Abstract
We utilize the bibliometric tool of co-word analysis to identify trends in the methods and subjects of ecology during the period 1970–2005. Few previous co-word analyses have attempted to analyze fields as large as ecology. We utilize a method of isolating concepts and methods in large datasets that undergo the most significant upward and downward trends. Our analysis identifies policy-relevant trends in the field of ecology, a discipline that helps to identify and frame many contemporary policy problems. The results provide a new foundation for exploring the relations among public policies, technological change, and the evolution of science priorities.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bacher, J., Cluster Analysis. Nuremberg: University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, 2002.
Bauin, S., B. Michelet, M. G. Schweighoffer, P. Vermeulin (1991), Using bibliometrics in strategic analysis: “understanding chemical reactions” at the CNRS. Scientometrics 22(1): 113.
Bhattacharya, S., P. K. Basu (1998), Mapping a research area at the micro level using co-word analysis. Scientometrics, 43(3): 359–372.
Borner, K, Chaomei Chen, K. W. Boyack (2003), Visualizing knowledge domains. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, (ARIST), 37: 179–255.
Cahlik, T. (2000), Comparison of the Maps of Science. Scientometrics, 49(3): 373.
Callon, M. (1986), The Sociology of an Actor-Network: The Case of the Electric Vehicle. In: Mapping the Dynamics of Science and Technology, edited by M. Callon, J. Law, A. Rip. London: Macmillian.
Callon, M., J. Law, A. Rip, How to Study the Force of Science. In: Mapping the Dynamics of Science and Technology: Sociology of Science in the Real World, M. Callon, J. Law, A. Rip (Eds), London: Macmillan, 1986.
Callon, M., J. Law, A. Rip, Qualitative Scientometrics. In: Mapping the Dynamics of Science and Technology. Sociology of Science in the Real World, M. Callon, J. Law, A. Rip (Eds), London: Macmillian, 1986.
Callon, M., J. Law, A. Rip, (Eds), Mapping the Dynamics of Science and Technology: Sociology of Science in the Real World. London: Macmillan, 1986.
Callon, M. N., J. P. N. Courtial, F. N. Laville (1991), Co-word analysis as a tool for describing the network of interactions between basic and technological research: The case of polymer chemsitry. Scientometrics 22(1): 155–205.
Carvalho, Priscilla, J. Diniz-Filho, F. Alexandre, L. M. Bini (2005), The impact of Felsenstein’s “Phylogenies and the comparative method” on evolutionary biology. Scientometrics 62(1): 53.
Cooper, G. J., The Science of the Struggle for Existence: On the Foundations of Ecology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
Coulter, N., I. Monarch, S. Konda (1998), Software engineering as seen through its research literature: A study in co-word analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(13): 1206–1223.
Ding, Y., G. G. Chowdhury, S. Foo. (2001), Bibliometric cartography of information retrieval research by using co-word analysis. Information Processing and Management, 37(6): 817–842.
Duarte, C. M. (1999), Seagrass ecology at the turn of the millennium: challenges for the new century. Aquatic Botany, 65(1): 7–20.
Garfield, E. (1994), Scientography: Mapping the Tracks of Science. Current Contents, (November).
Gieryn, T. F. (1978), Problem Retention and Problem Change in Science. Sociological Inquiry, 48(3/4): 96.
Gordon, A. D., Hierarchical classification. In: Clustering and Classification, edited by P. Arabie, L. J. Hubert, G. D. Soete. River Edge, NJ: World Scientific Publishing, 1996.
Hacking, I., Weapons Research. In: The Social Construction of What?: Harvard, 1999.
He, Q. (1999), Knowledge discovery through co-word analysis. Library Trends, 48: 133–159.
Healey, P., H. Rothman, P. K. Hoch (1986), An experiment in science mapping for research planning. Research Policy, 15(5): 233.
Jasanoff, S., Wynne, B. (1997), Science and decision making, In: S. Rayner, E. L. Malone (Eds), Human Choice and Climate Change, Volume 1: The Societal Framework, Colombus, OH: Battelle, pp. 1–87.
Kingsland, S. E., Modeling Nature: Episodes in the History of Population Ecology: University of Chicago Press, 1995.
Kingsland, S. E, The Evolution of American Ecology, 1890–2000. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2005.
Kleinman, D. L. (1991), Conceptualizing the politics of science: A response to cambrosio, limoges and pronovost, Social Studies of Science, 21(4): 769–774.
Kohler, R. E., Landscapes and Labscapes: Exploring the Lab-Field Border in Biology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002.
Kwa, C. (1987), Representations of nature mediating between ecology and science policy: The case of the international biological programme. Social Studies of Science, 17(3): 413–442.
Kwa, C. (2005), Local ecologies and global science: discourses and strategies of the international geospherebiosphere programme. Social Studies of Science, 35(6): 923–950.
Latour, B., S. Woolgar, Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts: Princeton University Press, 1986.
Law, J., S. Bauin, J. P. Courtial, J. Whittaker (1988), Policy and the mapping of scientific change: A coword analysis of research into environmental acidification. Scientometrics, 14(3): 251–264.
Leydesdorff, L. (1997), Why words and co-words cannot map the development of the sciences. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 48(5): 418–427.
Peters, H. P. F., A. F. J. van Raan (1993a), Co-word-based science maps of chemical engineering. Part I: Representations by direct multidimensional scaling. Research Policy, 22(1): 23.
Peters, H. P. F., A. F. J. van Raan (1993b). Co-word-based science maps of chemical engineering. Part II: Representations by combined clustering and multidimensional scaling. Research Policy, 22(1): 47.
Rip, A. (1988), Mapping of science: possibilities and limitations. In: Handbook of Quantitative Studies of Science and Technology, A. F. J. van Raan (Ed.), Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Rivera, A. C. (2003), Trends in the evolution of ecology: “Spain is different”. Web Ecology, 4: 14–21.
Rodriguez, K., J.A. Moreiro. (1996), The growth and development of research in the field of ecology. Scientometrics, 35(1): 59–70.
Salvador, M. R., R. E. Lopez-Martinez. (2000), Cognitive structure of research: scientometric mapping in sintered materials. Research Evaluation, 9(3): 189–200.
Schoepflin, U., W. Glanzel. (2001), Two decades of “Scientometrics”. An interdisciplinary field represented by its leading journal. Scientometrics, 50(2): 301.
Takacs, D., The Idea of Biodiversity: Philosophies of Paradise: Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996.
White, H. D., K. W. McCain. (1998), Visualizing a discipline: An author co-citation analysis of information science, 1972–1995. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(4):327–355.
Whittaker, J. (1989), Creativity and Conformity in Science: Titles, Keywords and Co-Word Analysis. Social Studies of Science, 19(3): 473–496.
Whittaker, J., J. P. COURTIAL, J. LAW. (1989), Creativity and Conformity in Science: Titles, Keywords and Co-Word Analysis. Social Studies of Science, 19(3): 473–496.
Worster, D., Nature’s Economy: A History of Ecological Ideas. Second edition ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.
Young, R. F., S. A. Wolf (2006), Goal attainment in urban ecology research: A bibliometric review 1975–2004. Urban Ecosystems, 9(3): 179–193.
Ziman, J. M. (1987), The problem of “problem choice”. Minerva, 25(1): 92–106.
Zuckerman, H. (1978), Theory choice and problem choice in science. Sociological Inquiry, 48(3/4): 65.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Neff, M.W., Corley, E.A. 35 years and 160,000 articles: A bibliometric exploration of the evolution of ecology. Scientometrics 80, 657–682 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-008-2099-3
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-008-2099-3