IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v111y2017i3d10.1007_s11192-017-2340-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How the analysis of transitionary references in knowledge networks and their centrality characteristics helps in understanding the genesis of growing technology areas

Author

Listed:
  • Konstantin Fursov

    (National Research University Higher School of Economics)

  • Alina Kadyrova

    (National Research University Higher School of Economics)

Abstract

Since early 1960s, there has been a growing interest in the emergence and development of new technologies accompanied by a strong wish from decision makers to govern related processes at the corporate and national levels. One of the key categories that appeared to set up analytical and regulatory frameworks was the ‘advanced technology’ category. Primarily associated with computer electronics and microelectronics, it soon had new meanings derived from a variety of professional discussions primarily in the social sciences. Later in a new term, ‘emerging technologies’, appeared to highlight the speed of change in a wide range of promising research areas. This paper focuses on the evolution of academic discussions concerning advanced and emerging technologies in social sciences literature for the period from 1955 until 2015. In order to identify whether studies in these areas constitute separate research fields, the paper studies the evolution of co-citation networks and the centrality characteristics of transitionary references. It was shown that social studies in emerging technologies demonstrate better consistency in background in literature. However, an analysis of transitionary references and their centrality characteristics can hardly confirm the existence of separate research fields in both cases. The suggested method for the identification and tracking of papers mediating ongoing discussions in a selected knowledge network may be helpful in understanding the evolution of weakly conceptualized and growing research areas.

Suggested Citation

  • Konstantin Fursov & Alina Kadyrova, 2017. "How the analysis of transitionary references in knowledge networks and their centrality characteristics helps in understanding the genesis of growing technology areas," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1947-1963, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:111:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-017-2340-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-017-2340-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-017-2340-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-017-2340-z?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Malerba, Franco, 2002. "Sectoral systems of innovation and production," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 247-264, February.
    2. Fagerberg, Jan & Verspagen, Bart, 2009. "Innovation studies--The emerging structure of a new scientific field," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 218-233, March.
    3. John R. Baldwin & David Sabourin, 2002. "Advanced technology use and firm performance in Canadian manufacturing in the 1990s," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 11(4), pages 761-789, August.
    4. Robert K. Abercrombie & Akaninyene W. Udoeyop & Bob G. Schlicher, 2012. "A study of scientometric methods to identify emerging technologies via modeling of milestones," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(2), pages 327-342, May.
    5. Lili Wang & Ad Notten & Alexandru Surpatean, 2013. "Interdisciplinarity of nano research fields: a keyword mining approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(3), pages 877-892, March.
    6. David J. TEECE, 2008. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 5, pages 67-87, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    7. Fagerberg, Jan & Landström, Hans & Martin, Ben R., 2012. "Exploring the emerging knowledge base of ‘the knowledge society’," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 1121-1131.
    8. Small, Henry & Boyack, Kevin W. & Klavans, Richard, 2014. "Identifying emerging topics in science and technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(8), pages 1450-1467.
    9. Rotolo, Daniele & Hicks, Diana & Martin, Ben R., 2015. "What is an emerging technology?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(10), pages 1827-1843.
    10. Fagerberg, Jan & Fosaas, Morten & Sapprasert, Koson, 2012. "Innovation: Exploring the knowledge base," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 1132-1153.
    11. Joachim Schummer, 2004. "Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and patterns of research collaboration in nanoscience and nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 59(3), pages 425-465, March.
    12. Alan L Porter & J David Roessner & Xiao-Yin Jin & Nils C Newman, 2002. "Measuring national ‘emerging technology’ capabilities," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 29(3), pages 189-200, June.
    13. Henry Small, 1973. "Co‐citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 24(4), pages 265-269, July.
    14. Nees Jan Eck & Ludo Waltman, 2010. "Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(2), pages 523-538, August.
    15. Viswanath Venkatesh & Fred D. Davis, 2000. "A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(2), pages 186-204, February.
    16. Hélène Dernis & Mariagrazia Squicciarini & Roberto Pinho, 2016. "Detecting the emergence of technologies and the evolution and co-development trajectories in science (DETECTS): a ‘burst’ analysis-based approach," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(5), pages 930-960, October.
    17. Wolfgang Keller, 2004. "International Technology Diffusion," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(3), pages 752-782, September.
    18. Fred D. Davis & Richard P. Bagozzi & Paul R. Warshaw, 1989. "User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(8), pages 982-1003, August.
    19. Alan L. Porter & Ismael Rafols, 2009. "Is science becoming more interdisciplinary? Measuring and mapping six research fields over time," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(3), pages 719-745, December.
    20. Jian Wang, 2013. "Citation time window choice for research impact evaluation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(3), pages 851-872, March.
    21. G.S. Dangayach & S.G. Deshmukh, 2004. "Advanced manufacturing technologies: evidences from Indian automobile companies," International Journal of Manufacturing Technology and Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 6(5), pages 426-433.
    22. Loet Leydesdorff, 2007. "Betweenness centrality as an indicator of the interdisciplinarity of scientific journals," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 58(9), pages 1303-1319, July.
    23. Henry Small, 2004. "On the shoulders of Robert Merton: Towards a normative theory of citation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 60(1), pages 71-79, May.
    24. Henry Small, 1999. "Visualizing science by citation mapping," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 50(9), pages 799-813.
    25. Erjia Yan & Ying Ding, 2009. "Applying centrality measures to impact analysis: A coauthorship network analysis," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 60(10), pages 2107-2118, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Singh, Shiwangi & Dhir, Sanjay & Das, V. Mukunda & Sharma, Anuj, 2020. "Bibliometric overview of the Technological Forecasting and Social Change journal: Analysis from 1970 to 2018," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    2. Dennys Eduardo Rossetto & Roberto Carlos Bernardes & Felipe Mendes Borini & Cristiane Chaves Gattaz, 2018. "Structure and evolution of innovation research in the last 60 years: review and future trends in the field of business through the citations and co-citations analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(3), pages 1329-1363, June.
    3. Piñeiro-Chousa, Juan & López-Cabarcos, M. Ángeles & Romero-Castro, Noelia María & Pérez-Pico, Ada María, 2020. "Innovation, entrepreneurship and knowledge in the business scientific field: Mapping the research front," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 475-485.
    4. Souzanchi Kashani, Ebrahim & Roshani, Saeed, 2019. "Evolution of innovation system literature: Intellectual bases and emerging trends," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 68-80.
    5. Rafols, Ismael & Leydesdorff, Loet & O’Hare, Alice & Nightingale, Paul & Stirling, Andy, 2012. "How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: A comparison between Innovation Studies and Business & Management," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 1262-1282.
    6. Daniele Rotolo & Ismael Rafols & Michael Hopkins & Loet Leydesdorff, 2014. "Scientometric Mapping as a Strategic Intelligence Tool for the Governance of Emerging Technologies," SPRU Working Paper Series 2014-10, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    7. Li, Munan & Porter, Alan L. & Suominen, Arho, 2018. "Insights into relationships between disruptive technology/innovation and emerging technology: A bibliometric perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 285-296.
    8. Petros Gkotsis & Antonio Vezzani, 2016. "Technological diffusion as a recombinant process," JRC Working Papers on Corporate R&D and Innovation 2016-07, Joint Research Centre.
    9. Wagner, Caroline S. & Roessner, J. David & Bobb, Kamau & Klein, Julie Thompson & Boyack, Kevin W. & Keyton, Joann & Rafols, Ismael & Börner, Katy, 2011. "Approaches to understanding and measuring interdisciplinary scientific research (IDR): A review of the literature," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 14-26.
    10. Ismael Rafols & Alan Porter & Loet Leydesdorff, 2009. "Overlay Maps of Science: a New Tool for Research Policy," SPRU Working Paper Series 179, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    11. Sohrabi, Babak & Khalilijafarabad, Ahmad, 2018. "Systematic method for finding emergence research areas as data quality," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 280-287.
    12. Li, Munan & Porter, Alan L. & Suominen, Arho & Burmaoglu, Serhat & Carley, Stephen, 2021. "An exploratory perspective to measure the emergence degree for a specific technology based on the philosophy of swarm intelligence," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    13. Hric, Darko & Kaski, Kimmo & Kivelä, Mikko, 2018. "Stochastic block model reveals maps of citation patterns and their evolution in time," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 757-783.
    14. Rotolo, Daniele & Hicks, Diana & Martin, Ben R., 2015. "What is an emerging technology?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(10), pages 1827-1843.
    15. Katalin Orosz & Illés J. Farkas & Péter Pollner, 2016. "Quantifying the changing role of past publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(2), pages 829-853, August.
    16. Wooseok Jang & Heeyeul Kwon & Yongtae Park & Hakyeon Lee, 2018. "Predicting the degree of interdisciplinarity in academic fields: the case of nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 231-254, July.
    17. Philip Shapira & Seokbeom Kwon & Jan Youtie, 2017. "Tracking the emergence of synthetic biology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(3), pages 1439-1469, September.
    18. Baldwin, Carliss Y. & Bogers, Marcel L.A.M. & Kapoor, Rahul & West, Joel, 2024. "Focusing the ecosystem lens on innovation studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(3).
    19. Tsung Teng Chen, 2012. "The development and empirical study of a literature review aiding system," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(1), pages 105-116, July.
    20. Gaviria-Marin, Magaly & Merigó, José M. & Baier-Fuentes, Hugo, 2019. "Knowledge management: A global examination based on bibliometric analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 194-220.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:111:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-017-2340-z. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.