Biblioshiny Analysis Notes

Reading 2: Guidelines for bibliometric analyses

Mukherjee, D., Lim, W. M., Kumar, S., & Donthu, N. (2022). Guidelines for advancing theory and practice through bibliometric research. Journal of Business Research, 148, 101-115. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.04.042 

"there exists a tension in the field about the potential contribution of bibliometric research in relation to advancing theory" (p. 103). Which is why this article was written, to describe how bibliometric reviews can contribute to building knowledge in a field by contributing theory and practice. "In other words, bibliometric studies must extend beyond descriptive lists of citations and findings that lack plots" (p. 103) >> therefore the need to find a narrative that makes meaning. 

"We identify 10 distinct ways in which bibliometric studies can help advance theory and guide practice."

Bibliometric Analysis elements (p. 103)

(i) a domain, which may manifest as 

(a) a construct, such as customer engagement >> presence in VR

(b) a context, such as India >> globally

(c) a discipline, such as management >> interdisciplinary

(d) a field, such as strategic management >> education, training

(e) an outlet, such as the Journal of Business Research >> 

(ii) a method, such as fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis or event study; >>

(iii) a theory, such as dynamic capability theory or theory of planned behaviour.  >> complex adaptive systems.

Foundations for theory development (p. 103)

(i) What factors are of interest (map of the conceptual landscape); 

(ii) How those factors are related (nomological network); 

(iii) Why those factors are related (causal mechanisms); and 

(iv) Who, where, and when (temporal and contextual factors), which act as boundary conditions. 

"Other review variants, such as integrative frameworks and thematic reviews, manually involve content or thematic analysis aimed to uncover the major themes in a given field—and thus may be less efficient and more prone to subjective biases. In contrast, science mapping helps us accomplish the same goal more efficiently and objectively through technology-enabled automated analysis of quantitative measures (e.g., citations and co-occurrences) in bibliometric reviews as opposed to the manual analysis of quantitative and qualitative data in other review variants such as integrative frameworks and thematic reviews." (p. 106).

"Social network analysis" techniques (e.g., co-authorship or co-citation analysis)

"Bibliometric indicators should be used with some caution; such indicators may be biased against novel articles because new articles are less likely than older articles to be highly cited" (p. 106).