Ontological Security with its Widening and Deepening Boundaries: An Evaluation through a Bibliometric Analysis and Systematic Literature Review Lens

Abstract

Using rigorous bibliometric and systematic methodologies, this article comprehensively reviews academic studies on ontological security. Based on a Web of Science (WoS) retrieved dataset of 163 articles in International Relations and Political Science journals, the article has examined issues such as keywords, authorship, citation networks, and countries through bibliometric analysis. This quantitative analysis revealing the “widening” dimension of ontological security is complemented by a qualitative overview based on a systematic literature review to highlight the “deepening” dimension of ontological security. Together with an assessment of Turkish academia’s contribution to this widening and deepening literature, the article provides a map of ontological security for future studies.

Keywords

• Bibliometric analysis
• systematic literature review
• ontological security
• widening
• deepening

References

1. Adısönmez, Umut Can, and Laçin İdil Öztığ. “A Psychoanalytic Approach to Turkish Foreign Policy: Crisis, Disorder, and Disorientation.” Critical Studies on Security (2024): 1-22.
2. Adısönmez, Umut Can, and Recep Onursal. ““Strong, but Anxious State.” The Fantasmatic Narratives on Ontological Insecurity and Anxiety in Turkey.” Uluslararası İlişkiler 19, no. 73 (2022): 65-79.
3. Al, Umut, İrem Soydal, and Haydar Yalçın. “Bibliyometrik Özellikleri Açısından Bilig’in Değerlendirilmesi.” Bilig 55, (2010): 1-20.
4. Andrés, Ana. Measuring Academic Research: How to Undertake a Bibliometric Study. Oxford: Chandos Publishing, 2009.
5. Anwar, Muhammad Azfar, Zhou Rongting, Wang Dong, and Fahad Asmi. “Mapping the Knowledge of National Security in 21st Century a Bibliometric Study.” Cogent Social Sciences 4, no. 1 (2018): 1-18.
6. Aydınlı, Ersel, and Julie Mathews. “Are the Core and Periphery Irreconcilable? The Curious World of Publishing in Contemporary International Relations.” International Studies Perspectives 1, no. 3 (2000): 289–303.
7. Bachleitner, Kathrin. “Ontological Security as Temporal Security? The Role of ‘Significant Historical Others’ in World Politics.” International Relations 37, no. 1 (2023): 25-47.
8. Berenskoetter, Felix. “Parameters of a National Biography.” European Journal of International Relations 20, no. 1 (2014): 262-288.

9. Broadus. Robert N. “Toward a Definition of “Bibliometrics.”” Scientometrics 12, no. 5-6 (1987): 373-379.
10. Browning, Christopher S., and Pertti Joenniemi. “Ontological Security, Self-Articulation and the Securitization of Identity.” Cooperation and Conflict 52, no. 1 (2017): 31-47.
11. Çoki̇şler, Elvan. “Uluslararası İlişkiler Dergisinin Bibliyometrik Analizi (2004-2017.” Uluslararası İlişkiler 16, no. 64 (2019): 29–56.
12. Curanović, Alicja, and Piotr Szymański. “Mission Saves Us All: Great Russia and Global Britain Dealing with Ontological Insecurity.” International Relations 38, no. 4 (2022): 1-25.
13. Dale, Tony, and Shaun Goldfinch. “Article Citation Rates and Productivity of Australasian Political Science Units 1995–2002.” Australian Journal of Political Science 40, no. 3 (2005): 425-434.
14. Deacon, Chris. “Perpetual Ontological Crisis: National Division, Enduring Anxieties and South Korea’s Discursive Relationship with Japan.” European Journal of International Relations 29, no. 4 (2023): 1041-1065.
15. Ellegaard, Ole, and Johan A. Wallin. “The Bibliometric Analysis of Scholarly Production: How Great is the Impact?.” Scientometrics 105, no. 3 (2015): 1809-1831.
16. Ermihan, Erman. “End of Jouissance, Start of Resentment: A Lacanian Critical Security Approach to Turkey’s Relations with the West.” Critical Studies on Security (2024): 1-19.
17. Giddens, Anthony. Central Problems in Social Theory: Action, Structure and Contradictions in Social Analysis. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1979.
18. Giddens, Anthony. Modernity and Self Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age. California: Stanford University Press, 1991.
19. Groos, Ole V., and Alan Pritchard. “Documentation Notes.” Journal of Documentation 25, no. 4 (1969): 344–349.
20. Gustafsson, Karl, and Nina C. Krickel-Choi. “Returning to the Roots of Ontological Security: Insights from T-the Existentialist Anxiety Literature.” European Journal of International Relations 26, no. 3 (2020): 875-895.
21. Holsti, Kalevi Jaakko. The Dividing Discipline: Hegemony and Diversity in International Theory. Boston: Allen & Unwin, 1985.
22. Homolar, Alexandra, and Ronny Scholz. “The Power of Trump-Speak: Populist Crisis Narratives and Ontological Security.” Cambridge Review of International Affairs 32, no. 3 (2019): 344-364.
23. Huang, Muhsuan, and Yu-wei Chang. “Characteristics of Research Output in Social Sciences and Humanities: From a Research Evaluation Perspective.” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 59, no. 11 (2008): 1819-1828.
24. Hulme, Edward Wyndham. Statistical Bibliography in Relation to the Growth of Modern Civilization: Two Lectures Delivered in the University of Cambridge in May 1922. London: Butler & Tanner, 1923.
25. Ilgıt, Aslı. “Ontolojik Güvenlik: Güvenliği (Yeniden) Okurken Kimlikler ve Duygular.” In Güvenliği Yeniden Okumak: Güvenlik Çalışmalarında Kavramlar, Aktörler ve Güncel Konular, edited by Harun Arıkan and Ali Gök, 77-92. Ankara: Yetkin Yayınları, 2024.
26. Kayhan-Pusane, Özlem, and Aslı Ilgıt. “Ontological Insecurity, Anxiety, and Hubris: An Affective Account of Turkey-KRG Relations.” Uluslararası İlişkiler 19, no. 73 (2022): 99-115.
27. Khaldi, Hanen, and Vicente Prado-Gascó. “Bibliometric Maps and Co-Word Analysis of the Literature on International Cooperation on Migration.” Quality and Quantity 55, no. 5 (2021): 1845–1869.
28. Kinnvall, Catarina, and Jennifer Mitzen. “An Introduction to the Special Issue: Ontological Securities in World Politics.” Cooperation and Conflict 52, no. 1 (2017): 3-11.
29. Kinnvall, Catarina, and Jennifer Mitzen. “Anxiety, Fear, and Ontological Security in World Politics: Thinking with and beyond Giddens.” International Theory 12, no. 2 (2020): 240-256.
30. Kinnvall, Catarina. Globalization and Religious Nationalism in India. London, Routledge, 2006.
31. Krickel-Choi, Nina C. “The Embodied State: Why and How Physical Security Matters for Ontological Security.” Journal of International Relations and Development 25, no. 1 (2022): 159-181.
32. Kristensen, Peter Marcus. “Revisiting the ‘American Social Science’-Mapping the Geography of International Relations.” International Studies Perspectives 16, no. 3 (2015): 246-269.
33. Laing, Ronald David. The Divided Self: An Existential Study in Sanity and Madness. London: Tavistock Publications Ltd, 1960.
34. Lawani, Stephen Majebi. “Bibliometrics: Its Theoretical Foundations, Methods and Applications.” Libri 31, no. 4 (1981): 294–315.
35. Liu, Xingjian, Song Hong, and Yaolin Liu. “A Bibliometric Analysis of 20 Years of Globalization Research: 1990–2009.” Globalization 9, no. 2 (2012): 195–210.
36. Lupovici, Amir. “Ontological Dissonance, Clashing Identities, and Israel’s Unilateral Steps towards the Palestinians.” Review of International Studies 38, no. 4 (2012): 809-833.
37. Mehmetcik, Hakan, and Hasan Hakses. “Turkish IR Journals through a Bibliometric Lens.” All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace 12, no. 1 (2023): 61-84.
38. Mehmetcik, Hakan, Emel Parlar Dal and Hasan Hakses. “Understanding Turkish Foreign Policy Studies: A Bibliometric Analysis.” Alternatives, (2024): 1-22.
39. Mitzen, Jennifer. “Ontological Security in World Politics: State Identity and the Security Dilemma.” European Journal of International Relations 12, no. 3 (2006): 344-345.
40. Papageorgiou, Maria Mary, and Alena Vieira. “Mapping the Literature on China and Russia in IR and Area Studies: A Bibliometric Analysis (1990–2019.” Journal of Chinese Political Science 27, no. 1 (2021): 155–181.
41. Rumelili, Bahar, and Ayşe Betül Çelik. “Ontological Insecurity in Asymmetric Conflicts: Reflections on Agonistic Peace in Turkey’s Kurdish Issue.” Security Dialogue 48, no. 4 (2017): 279-296.
42. Rumelili, Bahar, and Nasuh Sofuoglu. “Ontological Insecurity and the Return of the Greek-Turkish Conflicts: Reconfiguring Hagia Sophia as an Ontic Space.” Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies (2024): 1-19.
43. Rumelili, Bahar, and Umut Can Adısönmez. “Uluslararası İlişkilerde Kimlik-Güvenlik İlişkisine Dair Yeni Bir Paradigma: Ontolojik Güvenlik Teorisi.” Uluslararası İlişkiler 17, no. 66 (2020): 23-39.
44. Rumelili, Bahar. “Identity and Desecuritization: The Pitfalls of Conflating Ontological and Physical Security.” Journal of International Relations and Development 18 (2015): 52-74.
45. Sandal, Nukhet Ahu, and Ahmet Erdi Ozturk. “Critical Junctures of Securitization: The Case of the AK Party in Turkey.” Alternatives 48, no. 1 (2023): 38-53.
46. Shih, Chih-yu, and Jason Luo. “Ontological Security Dilemma: A Practical Model of Relational Deterrence.” Journal of Chinese Political Science 29, no. 2 (2023): 1-24.
47. Steele, Brent J. Ontological Security in International Relations: Self-Identity and the IR State. London: Routledge, 2008.
48. Subotić, Jelena. “Narrative, Ontological Security, and Foreign Policy Change.” Foreign Policy Analysis 12, no. 4 (2016): 610-627.
49. Wæver, Ole. “The Sociology of a Not So International Discipline: American and European Developments in International Relations.” International Organization 52, no. 4 (1998): 687–727.
50. Wæver, Ole. “The Sociology of a not so International Discipline: American and European Developments in International Relations.” International Organization 52, no. 4 (1998): 687-727.
51. Waismel-Manor, Israel, and Theodore J. Lowi. “Politics in Motion: A Personal History of Political Science.” New Political Science 33, no.1 (2011): 59-78.
52. Zhang, Zhihui, Jason E. Rollins, and Evangelia Lipitakis. “China’s Emerging Centrality in the Contemporary International Scientific Collaboration Network.” Scientometrics 116, no. 2 (2018): 1075-1091.
53. Zupic, Ivan, and Tomaž Čater. “Bibliometric Methods in Management and Organization.” Organizational Research Methods 18, no. 3 (2015): 429-472.