Co-citation analysis, bibliographic coupling, and direct citation: Which citation approach represents the research front most accurately?

By Kevin W. Boyack, Richard Klavans. J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol., 2010

1,418 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Molecular Biology, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ead1db96336c29fd27edbb03d18cbd7876d9894f

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Artificial Intelligence

In Molecular Biology

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

Cultural intelligence, global mindset, and cross-cultural competencies: a systematic review using bibliometric methods (2020, background): “We also included two seminal books on CQ (Earley and Ang, 2003; Ang and Van Dyne, 2008b) as external references to our sample (see Boyack and Klavans, 2010) due to a high number of co-citations identified for the two sources.”
Large-scale analysis of the accuracy of the journal classification systems of Web of Science and Scopus (2015, neutral): “ Algorithmic approaches to construct such publication-‐level classification systems have been studied in a number of recent papers (Boyack & Klavans, 2010; Boyack et al., 2011; Klavans & Boyack, 2015; Waltman & Van Eck, 2012).”
Citation-based clustering of publications using CitNetExplorer and VOSviewer (2017, methodology): “In the case of citation relations, a further distinction can be made between direct citation relations, bibliographic coupling relations, and co-citation relations (e.g., Boyack and Klavans 2010; Klavans and Boyack 2017).”
Identifying emerging topics in science and technology (2014, positive): “Rather than using all links, we reduce the size of the calculation by filtering links, keeping up to 15 links (based on the highest K50 values) per paper (Boyack and Klavans, 2010).”
Document co-citation analysis to enhance transdisciplinary research (2018, methodology): “Alternative methods, such as document bibliographic coupling, may be better suited to understand the evolution of research trends (25, 26).”
Evolution of research subjects in library and information science based on keyword, bibliographical coupling, and co-citation analyses (2015, methodology): “The number of studies using bibliographic coupling analysis has increased (Boyack and Klavans 2010; Ma 2012; Zhao and Strotmann 2014; Yan and Ding 2012).”
Modelling decisions on energy-efficient renovations: A review (2014, background): “A study by Boyack and Klavans (2010) that compares the accuracies of different cluster solutions concludes that a direct citation network is by far the least accurate approach to map the research front.”
Industry 4.0: A Bibliometric Review of Its Managerial Intellectual Structure and Potential Evolution in the Service Industries (2019, methodology): “This bibliometric method has been found to be the most suitable to map novel research streams in an emerging field (Boyack and Klavans, 2010).”
Insights into relationships between disruptive technology/innovation and emerging technology: A bibliometric perspective (2017, methodology): “Bibliographic coupling analysis also facilitates visualization of research frontiers for a specific topic (Boyack & Klavans, 2010; Gazni & Didegah, 2016; Li et al., 2017).”
Mapping the field: a bibliometric analysis of the literature on university–industry collaborations (2017, methodology): “To analyse publication scientific mapping patterns and to evaluate the similarity of U–I literature themes, co-citation analysis and bibliographic coupling techniques were applied (Boyack and Klavans 2010; Kessler 1963; Small 1973).”