skip to main content
10.1145/3227696.3227728acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmisncConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Visualizing the intellectual structure and evolution of innovation systems research: a bibliometric analysis

Authors Info & Claims
Published:16 July 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

Commercial business simulation games (BSGs) have been well developed since 1956, and thus they have been extensively adopted and researched. Faria et al. (2009) published an insightful 40-year review of BSGs. However, the articles of the analysis was only from Simulation and Gaming Journal for answering why BSG was adopted and how it was used. This research used the Web of Science academic online research database and CiteSpace software for additional bibliometrics analyses to demonstrate visually intellectual structures and developments. The present study uses citation analysis to detect and visualize disciplinary distributions, keyword co-word networks and references co-citation networks, as well as highly cited references to demonstrate the use of a science mapping approach to perform the review. Such that the researchers may apply the procedure to the review of a scientific domain of their own interest. And secondly, to identify major areas of research activities concerning science mapping, intellectual milestones in the development of key specialties, evolutionary stages of major specialties involved, and the dynamics of transitions from one specialty to another in business simulation games research from 2002 to 2018.

References

  1. Faria, A. J., Hutchinson, D., Wellington, W. J., & Gold, S. (2009) Developments in business gaming: A review of the past 40 years. Simulation & Gaming, 40(4), 464--487. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Kibbee, J. M., Craft, C. J., & Nanus, B. (1961). Management games. New York: Reinhold.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Horn, R. E., & Cleaves, A. (1980). The guide to simulations/games for education and training. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Faria, A. J., & Schumacher, M. (1996). Business simulation games: Current usage a ten year update, Developments in Business Simulation & Experiential Exercises, 11, 220--225.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Tao, Y.-H., Cheng, C.-J., and Sun, S.- Y, What influences college students to continue using business simulation games? The Taiwan experience, Computers & Education, 53(3), 2009, 929--939. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Faria, A. J. (1998). Business simulation games: current usage levels-an update, Simulation & Gaming, 29(3), 295--309. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. de Bellis, N. (2009). Bibliometrics and Citation Analysis Lanham, Maryland, Toronto, Plymouth, UK: The Scarecrow Press, Inc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Garfield, E. (1972). Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation, Science, 178(4060), 471--9.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Zhong, W., Wu, X., and Zhao, T. (2013). Progress analysis of library knowledge management research in China based on bibliometrics. Journal of Applied Sciences, 13(9), 1484--1488.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. van Eck, N.J., & Waltman, L. (2013). VOSviewer Manual, Leiden, Univeristeit Leiden, The Netherlands.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Chen, C. (2004). Searching for intellectual turning points: Progressive knowledge domain visualization. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America (PNAS), 101(suppl. 1), 5303--5310.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Chen, C. (2006). CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(3), 359--377. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Chen, C., Ibekwe-SanJuan, F., & Hou, J. (2010). The structure and dynamics of co-citation clusters: A multiple-perspective co-citation analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Wolfe, J. (1993). A history of business teaching games in English-speaking and postsocialist countries: The origination and diffusion of a management education and development technology. Simulation & Gaming, 24(4), 446--463. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Tao, Y.-H.,Yeh, C. R. and, Hung, K.-C. (202). Effects of the heterogeneity of game complexity and user population in learning performance of business simulation games, Computers & Education, 59(4), 1350--1360. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Liu, W., Hu, G., Tang, L, & Wang, Y. (2015). China's global growth in social science research: Uncovering evidence from bibliometric analyses of SSCI publications (1978-2013), Journal of Informatics, 9, 555--569.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Rey-Marti, A., Ribeiro-Soriano, D., & Palacios-Marques, D. (2015). A bibliometric analysis of social entrepreneurship, Journal of Business Research,Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Kleinberg, J. (2003). Bursty and hierarchical structure in streams. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 7(4), 373--397. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Newman, M. E. J. (2006). Modularity and community structure in networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103(23), 8577--8582.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Kiili, K. & Lainema, T. (2008). Foundation for Measuring Engagement in Educational Games. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 19(3), 469--488. Waynesville, NC: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved March 15, 2018 from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/24197.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Charsky, D., & Mims, C. (2008). Integrating commercial off-the-shelf video games into school curriculums. TechTrends, 52(5), 38--44.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Charsky, D., & Ressler, W. (2011). "Games are made for fun": Lessons on the effects of concept maps in the classroom use of computer games. Computers and Education, 56(3), 604--615. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Barzilai, S., & Blau, I. (2014). Scaffolding game-based learning: Impact on learning achievements, perceived learning, and game experiences. Computers and Education, 70(October 2017), 65--79.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Asakawa, T., &Gilbert, N. (2003). Synthesizing experiences: Lessons to be learned from Internet-mediated simulation games. Simulation and Gaming, 34(1), 10--22. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Thavikulwat, P. (2004). The Architecture of Computerized Business Gaming Simulations. Simulation & Gaming, 35(2), 242--269. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Zantow, K., Knowlton, D. S., & Sharp, D. C. (2005). More Than Fun and Games: Reconsidering the Virtues of Strategic Management Simulations. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(4), 451--458. The Academy of Management. Retrieved fromGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Rauner, M. S., Kraus, M., & Schwarz, S. (2008). Competition under different reimbursement systems: The concept of an internet-based hospital management game. European Journal of Operational Research, 185(3), 948--963.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Lin, Y. L., & Tu, Y. Z. (2012). The values of college students in business simulation game: A means-end chain approach. Computers and Education, 58(4), 1160--1170. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Crookall, D. (2010). Serious games, debriefing, and simulation/gaming as a discipline. Simulation and Gaming, 41(6), 898--920. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Sitzmann, T. (2011). A meta-analytic examination of the instructional effectiveness of computer-based simulation games. Personnel Psychology, 64(2), 489--528.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Lin, Y. L., & Tu, Y. Z. (2012). The values of college students in business simulation game: A means-end chain approach. Computers and Education, 58(4), 1160--1170. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Siewiorek, A., Saarinen, E., Lainema, T., & Lehtinen, E. (2012). Learning leadership skills in a simulated business environment. Computers and Education, 58(1), 121--135. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Visualizing the intellectual structure and evolution of innovation systems research: a bibliometric analysis

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      MISNC '18: Proceedings of the 5th Multidisciplinary International Social Networks Conference
      July 2018
      177 pages
      ISBN:9781450364652
      DOI:10.1145/3227696

      Copyright © 2018 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 16 July 2018

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate57of97submissions,59%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader