İşbirlikçi Tüketim Alanının Bilimsel Performansının Bibliyometrik Analiz Yöntemiyle İncelenmesi

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, işbirlikçi tüketim alanında yapılan yayınları inceleyerek yayın yapan ülkelerin, kurumların, kaynakların, yazarların ve kelimelerin performans ve etkilerini belirleyerek literatürün mevcut durumunu ortaya koymak ve gelecekteki çalışmalar için genel bir yön sağlayabilmektir. Yöntem: Bu çalışmada, WoS veri tabanından elde edilen verilerle R programı bibliyometrix paketi kullanılarak bibliyometrik performans analizleri yapılmıştır. Bulgular: Çalışmada ilk önce işbirlikçi tüketim konulu yayınların genel profili çıkarılmıştır. Daha sonra araştırma soruları doğrultusunda toplam yayın sayısı, toplam atıf sayısı, sıklık ve çeşitli indeksler gibi ölçütler kullanılarak performans ve etkinliklerine göre ilk on ülke, kurum, kaynak, yazar ve kelime belirlenmiştir. Sonuç: Çalışmada; en etkili ülkelerin Çin ve ABD olduğu, en etkili kurumların Universitat Internacional de Catalunya ve Fudan University olduğu, en etkili kaynakların Journal of Cleaner Production ve Sustainability olduğu, en etkili yazarların Frederic Marimon ve Tsan-Ming Choi olduğu, en sık kullanılan anahtar kelimelerin sharing economy, collaborative consumption ve sustainability olduğu, genel olarak işbirlikçi tüketim literatürünün Bradford yasasına uyduğu ancak Lotka yasasına uymadığı sonuçlarına ulaşılmıştır. Özgünlük: Literatürde işbirlikçi tüketim konusu kapsayan bibliyometrik çalışmalar olsa da bunların büyük bir çoğunluğu paylaşım ekonomisi, işbirlikçi ekonomi, sürdürülebilirlik veya paylaşımlı tüketim gibi konulara odaklanmaktadır. Dolayısıyla bu çalışmanın özgün katkısı sadece işbirlikçi tüketim kavramının bilimsel performansının kapsamlı olarak belirlenmesine odaklanmasıdır.

Keywords

• İşbirlikçi tüketim
• bibliyometrik analiz
• performans analizi

Investigation of the Scientific Performance of the Collaborative Consumption Field by Bibliometric Analysis Method

Abstract

Aim: This study aims to examine publications in the field of collaborative consumption, determine the performance and impact of the countries, institutions, sources, authors, and words that publish, reveal the current state of the literature, and provide a general direction for future studies. Method: In this study, bibliometric performance analyses were conducted using data obtained from the WoS database with the R program bibliometrix package. Results: The study first outlined the general profile of publications on collaborative consumption. Then, based on the research questions, the top ten countries, institutions, sources, authors, and keywords were identified in terms of performance and effectiveness using criteria such as total number of publications, total number of citations, frequency, and various indices. Conclusion: The study found that the most influential countries were China and the US, the most influential institutions were the Universitat Internacional de Catalunya and Fudan University, the most influential sources were the Journal of Cleaner Production and Sustainability, and the most influential authors were Frederic Marimon and Tsan-Ming Choi. The most frequently used keywords were sharing economy, collaborative consumption, and sustainability. It was concluded that the collaborative consumption literature generally follows Bradford's law but does not comply with Lotka's law. Originality: Although bibliometric studies covering the topic of collaborative consumption are available in the literature, the vast majority of them focus on issues such as the sharing economy, collaborative economy, sustainability, or shared consumption. Therefore, the original contribution of this study is that it focuses solely on comprehensively determining the scientific performance of the concept of collaborative consumption.

Keywords

• Collaborative consumption
• bibliometric analysis
• performance analysis

Ethical Statement

İkincil veriler kullanıldığından etik kurul izni gerektirmemektedir.

References

1. Acquier, A., Daudigeos, T. & Pinkse, J. (2017). Promises and paradoxes of the sharing economy: An organizing framework. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 125, 1-10. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.07.006
2. Aria, M. & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). Bibliometrix: An R tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959–975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007
3. Arıkan Saltık, İ. (2020). Turist rehberliği konulu ulusal lisansüstü tezlerin bibliyometrik profili (1989-2018). Çankırı Karatekin Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 11(1), 45-69.
4. Aslantürk, E. & Baltacı, M. (2023). Turizmde yeşil pazarlama: Bibliyometrik bir analiz. Mersin Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 7(1), 45-56. https://doi.org/10.55044/meusbd.1368497
5. Aydınoğlu, A. U., İlhan, A. O. & Özer, Ö. K. (2023). Bir sosyal bilimler araştırma yöntemi olarak bibliyometri: Akademik girişimcilik örneği. Pamukkale Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 15, 235-258. https://doi.org/10.30794/pausbed.1124926
6. Belk, R. (2014). You are what you can access: sharing and collaborative consumption online. Journal of Business Research, 67(8), 1595-1600. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.10.001
7. Bornmann, L. & Daniel, H. (2008). What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior. Journal of Documentation, 64(1), 45-80. https://doi.org/10.1108/00220410810844150
8. Botsman, R. & Rogers, R. (2010). What’s mine is yours: The rise of collaborative consumption. HarperBusiness.

9. Cardoso, M. N., Lacerda, R. T. O. & Becker, M. (2022). Collaborative consumption and institutional theory: Bibliometric analysis of scientific production from 2011 to 2021. International Business Research, 15(12), 86. https://doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v15n12p86
10. 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. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20317
11. Cheng, M. (2016). Sharing economy: A review and agenda for future research. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 57, 60-70. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2016.06.003
12. Cucari, N., Tutore, I., Montera, R. & Profita, S. (2023). A bibliometric performance analysis of publication productivity in the corporate social responsibility field: Outcomes of SciVal analytics. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 30(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2346
13. Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N. & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133(March), 285-296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070
14. Eckhardt, G. M, Houston, M. B, Jiang, B., Lamberton, C., Rindfleisch, A. & Zervas, G. (2019). Marketing in the sharing economy. Journal of Marketing, 83(5), 5-27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022242919861929
15. Ekinci, G. & Bilginer-Özsaatçi, F. G. (2023). Bibliometric analysis of publications in artificial intelligence and marketing. Sosyoekonomi, 31(56), 369-388. https://doi.org/10.17233/sosyoekonomi.2023.02.17
16. Ertz, M. & Leblanc-Proulx, S. (2018). Sustainability in the collaborative economy: A bibliometric analysis reveals emerging interest. Journal of Cleaner Production, 196, 1073-1085. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.06.095
17. Ferreira, F. A. F. (2018). Mapping the field of arts-based management: Bibliographic coupling and co-citation analyses. Journal of Business Research, 85, 348-357. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.03.026
18. Ferreira, J. J. M. & Fernandes, A. J. C. (2023). Exploring theoretical lineages on collaborative consumption: trends and future research paths. Management Decision, July. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-04-2023-0671
19. Friedman, A. (2015). The Power of Lotka’s law through the eyes of R. Romanian Statistical Review, 2, 69-77.
20. Günay, H. F. (2023). Vergi uyumu konusundaki makalelerin web of science veri tabanına dayalı bibliyometrik analizi. International Journal of Public Finance, 8(2), 385-408. https://doi.org/10.30927/ijpf.1291303
21. Gutiérrez, J., García-Palomares, J. C., Romanillos, G. & Salas-Olmedo, M. H. (2017). The eruption of Airbnb in tourist cities: Comparing spatial patterns of hotels and peer-to-peer accommodation in Barcelona. Tourism Management, 62, 278-291. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2017.05.003
22. Hamari, J., Sjöklint, M. & Ukkonen, A. (2016). The sharing economy: Why people participate in collaborative consumption. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(9), 2047–2059. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23552
23. Heinrichs, H. (2013). Sharing economy: A potential new pathway to sustainability. GAIA - Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society, 22(4), 228-31. https://doi.org/10.14512/gaia.22.4.5
24. Khalek, S. A. & Chakraborty, A. (2023). Shared consumption and its determinants: A systematic literature review and future research agenda. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 47(3), 888-921. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12913
25. Kraus, S., Li, H., Kang, Q., Westhead, P. & Tiberius, V. (2020). The sharing economy: A bibliometric analysis of the state-of-the-art. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, 26(8), 1769-1786. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-06-2020-0438
26. Li, K., Rollins, J. & Yan, E. (2018). Web of Science use in published research and review papers 1997–2017: A selective, dynamic, cross-domain, content-based analysis. Scientometrics, 115(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2622-5
27. Lima, S. & Carlos Filho, F. de A. (2019). Bibliometric analysis of scientific production on sharing economy. Revista de Gestao, 26(3), 237-255. https://doi.org/10.1108/REGE-01-2019-0018
28. Lotka, A. J. (1926). The frequency distribution of scientific productivity. Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences, 16(12), 317-323. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24529203
29. Martin, C. J. (2016). The sharing economy: A pathway to sustainability or a nightmarish form of neoliberal capitalism? Ecological Economics, 121, 149-159. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.11.027
30. Moed, H. F. (2005). Citation analysis in research evaluation (1st ed.). Springer Dordrecht. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3714-7
31. Möhlmann, M. (2015). Collaborative consumption: Determinants of satisfaction and the likelihood of using a sharing economy option again. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 14(3), 193-207. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.1512
32. Mont, O., Palgan, Y. V., Bradley, K. & Zvolska, L. (2020). A decade of the sharing economy: Concepts, users, business and governance perspectives. Journal of Cleaner Production, 269, 122215. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122215
33. Özşavlı, M. (2025). Zorla yerinden edilmiş bireylerin dil eğitimine ilişkin akademik çalışmaların bibliyometrik performans analizi. Aydın Tömer Dil Dergisi, 10(1), 125-154. https://doi.org/10.17932/IAU.TOMER.2016.019/tomer_v010i1005
34. Rowlands, I. (2005). Emerald authorship data, Lotka’s law and research productivity. Aslib Proceedings, 57(1), 5-10. https://doi.org/10.1108/00012530510579039
35. Sandin, G. & Peters, G. M. (2018). Environmental impact of textile reuse and recycling – A review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 184, 353-365. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.266
36. Seçkin, Z. & İşler, F. (2023). Yeşil gi̇ri̇şi̇mci̇li̇k: Uluslararası yayın kaynaklarının bi̇bli̇yometri̇k anali̇zi̇. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 32(3), 203-222. https://doi.org/10.35379/cusosbil.1329841
37. Tayara, M. & Özel, Ç. H. (2019). Annals of tourism research dergisinde yayımlanan postmodern dönemde turizm konulu makaleler: Bibliyometrik inceleme. Anatolia: Turizm Araştırmaları Dergisi, 30(2), 100-111. https://doi.org/10.17123/atad.636845
38. Turgut, A. (2023). Lojistik ve tedarik zincirinde yapay zekâ çalışmaları: Bibliyometrik bir analiz. Alanya Akademik Bakış, 7(1), 461-480. https://doi.org/10.29023/alanyaakademik.1167224
39. Tussyadiah, I. P. & Pesonen, J. (2015). Impacts of peer-to-peer accommodation use on travel patterns. Journal of Travel Research, 55(8), 1022-1040. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287515608505
40. van Eck, N. J. & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523-538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3
41. Verified Market Research. (2025). Global sharing economy market size, industry trends, growth & forecast 2033. Verified Market Research. https://www.verifiedmarketreports.com/product/sharing-economy-market/
42. Vila-Lopez, N., & Küster-Boluda, I. (2021). Sharing-collaborative economy in tourism: A bibliometric analysis and perspectives for the post-pandemic era. Tourism Economics, 28(1), 272-288. https://doi.org/10.1177/13548166211035712
43. Wang, X., Lu, J., Song, Z., Zhou, Y., Liu, T. & Zhang, D. (2022). From past to future: Bibliometric analysis of global research productivity on nomogram (2000-2021). Frontiers in Public Health, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.997713
44. Zhu, J. & Liu, W. (2020). A tale of two databases: the use of Web of Science and Scopus in academic papers. Scientometrics, 123(1), 321-335. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03387-8
45. Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2014). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429-472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629