Is It Possıble To Understand The Conceptual Evolution of Public Polıcy Discipline Using Bibliometrics?: Science Mappıng Analysıs Of 1980-2014 Period

Öz

Public Policy Discipline has evolved continously since 1950’s. Whilst public policy studies have increased in number it has become difficult to monitor the evolution of the discipline via scientific publications. Web of Science (WoS), in this respect, serves researchers as the most inclusive database. Science Mapping Analysis, which is implemented according to the data retrieved from bibliographic sources, allows to see the change in conceptual structure of a specific scientific field over time. This study aims to understand the change in conceptual structure of Public Policy Discipline in the period of 1980-2014 by implementing Science Mapping Analysis. The analysis is implemented by using SciMAT, which has been developed for this purpose. Since 1990’s, it has been seen that thematic concentration of public policy studies has varied and new research areas have emerged while others have declined.

Keywords: public policy discipline, bibliometrics, conceptual evolution, science mapping analysis, SciMAT.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• public,policy

Kamu Politikası Disiplininin Kavramsal Gelişimini Bibliyometri Kullanarak Anlamak Mümkün Mü?: 1980-2014 Döneminin Bilimsel Haritalama Analizi

Öz

Kamu Politikası Disiplini, 1950’lerden itibaren sürekli gelişme göstermiştir. Kamu politikası çalışmaları artarken disiplinin gelişiminin bilimsel yayınlar yoluyla izlenmesi zorlaşmıştır. Web of Science (WoS), bu bakımdan araştırmacılara en kapsayıcı veritabanı olarak hizmet vermektedir. Bibliyografik kaynaklardan elde edilen verilere göre uygulanan Bilimsel Haritalama Analizi, belirli bir bilimsel alanın zaman içerisinde kavramsal yapısındaki değişimini görmeye imkân vermektedir. Bu çalışma, Kamu Politikası Disiplininin 1980-2014 döneminde kavramsal yapısındaki değişimi Bilimsel Haritalama Analizi uygulayarak anlamayı amaçlamaktadır. Analiz, bu amaçla geliştirilmiş SciMAT kullanılarak uygulanmaktadır. 1990’li yıllardan itibaren, kamu politikası çalışmalarında tematik yoğunlaşmanın değişiklik gösterdiği ve bazıları gerilerken yeni araştırma konularının ortaya çıktığı görülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler: kamu politikası disiplini, bibliyometri, kavramsal gelişim, bilimsel haritalama analizi, SciMAT.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• kamu,politika

Kaynakça

1. Bar-Ilan, Judith (2010), “Citations to the “Introduction to Informetrics’’ Indexed by WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar”, Scientometrics, 82(3): 495-506.
2. Börner, Katy-Chen, Chaomei-Boyack ve Kevin, W. (2003), “Visualizing Knowledge Domains”, Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 37: 179-255.
3. Callon, Michel, Courtial, Jean P., Turner, William A. ve Bauin, Serge (1983), “From Translations to Problematic Networks: An Introduction to Co-word Analysis”, Social Science Information, 22(2): 191-235.
4. Cobo, Manuel J., López Herrera, Antonio G., Herrera Viedma, Enrique ve Herrera, Francisco (2011a), “Science Mapping Software Tools: Review, Analysis, and Cooperative Study Among Tools”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(7): 1382-1402.
5. Cobo, Manuel J., López Herrera, Antonio G., Herrera Viedma, Enrique ve Herrera, Francisco (2011b), “An Approach for Detection, Quantifying, and Visualizing the Evolution of a Research Field: A Practical Application to the Fuzzy Sets Theory Field”, Journal of Informetrics, 5(1): 146-166.
6. Cobo, Manuel J., López Herrera, Antonio G., Herrera Viedma, Enrique ve Herrera, Francisco (2012), “SciMAT: A New Science Mapping Analysis Software Tool”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(8): 1609-1630.
7. Cook, Diane J. ve Holder, Lawrence B. (Eds) (2006), Mining Graph Data, John Wiley & Sons, New Jersey.
8. deLeon, Peter, Vogenbeck, Danielle M. (2007), The Policy Sciences at the Crossroads içinde Handbook of Public Policy Analysis Theory, Politics and Methods, Frank Fischer, Gerald J. Miller, Mara S. Sidney (Eds.), CRC Press, USA, s. 3-14.

9. Falagas, Matthew E., Pitsouni, Eleni I., Malietzis, George A. ve Pappas, Georgios (2008), “Comparison of Pubmed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: Strengths and Weaknesses”, FASEB Journal, 22(2): 338-342.
10. Garfield, Eugene (1994), “Scientography: Mapping the Tracks of Science”, Current Contents, 7: 5-10.
11. Goodman, D., Deis, L. (2005), “Web of Science (2004 version) and Scopus”, The Charleston Advisor, 6(3): 5-21.
12. Harzing,Anne-Wil, van der Wal, Ron (2007), “Google Scholar: the democratization of citation analysis?”, University of Melbourne, Australia, http://www.harzing.com/ download/gsdemo.pdf, Erişim Tarihi: 18.04.2016.
13. Jacso, P. (2005), “As we may search--comparison of major features of the Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar citation-based and citation-enhanced databases”, Current Science, 89(9): 1537-1547.
14. John, Peter (2013), “New Directions in Public Policy: Theories of Policy Change and Variation Reconsidered”, http://www.icpublicpolicy.org/IMG/pdf/panel_84_1 _peter_john.pdf, Erişim Tarihi: 14.04.2016.
15. Karasözen, Bülent, Bayram, Özlem, Zan, Burcu Umut (2011), “WoS ve Scopus Veri Tabanlarının Karşılaştırması”, Türk Kütüphaneciliği, 25(2): 238-260.
16. Martinez, M. Angeles, Cobo, Manuel J., Herrera, Manuel ve Herrera Viedma, Enrique (2015), “Analyzing the Scientific Evolution of Social Work Using Science Mapping”, Research on Social Work Practice, 25(2): 257-277.
17. Norris, M., Oppenheim, C. (2007), “Comparing alternatives to the Web of Science for coverage of the ‘social sciences’ literature”, Journal of Informetrics, 1(1): 161-169.
18. Noruzi, A. (2005), “Google Scholar: The New Generation of Citation Indexes”, LIBRI, 55(4):170-180.
19. Noyons, Everard C. M., Moed, Henk F. ve Van Rann, Ton (1999), “Integrating Research Perfomance Analysis and Science Mapping”, Scientometrics, 46(3): 591-604.
20. OECD (2015), “Scientific Advice for Policy Making: The Role and Responsibility of Expert Bodies and Individual Scientists”, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, No. 21, OECD Publishing, Paris.
21. Osareh, Farideh (1996), “Bibliometrics, Citation Analysis and Co-citation Analysis: A Review of Literature I”, Libri, 46(3): 149-158.
22. Small, H. (1999), “Visualizing Science by Citation Mapping”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(9): 799-813.
23. Torgerson, Douglas (2007), “Promoting the Policy Orientation: Lasswell in Context içinde Handbook of Public Policy Analysis Theory, Politics and Methods”, Frank Fischer, Gerald J. Miller, Mara S. Sidney (Eds.), CRC Press, USA, s. 15-28.
24. University of Leeds (2014), “Bibliometrics: An Overview”, file:///C:/Users/acer/Downloads/Bibliometrics_-_An_overview_-_Workbook_July_ 2014_PDF%20(1).pdf, Erişim Tarihi: 14.04.2016.
25. van Raan, A. F. J. (2005), “Measuring science” in H. F. Moed, W. Glanzel, U. Schmoch (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative science and technology research, Springer, Netherlands, 19-50.
26. White, Howard D., McCain, Katherine W. (1998), “Visualizing A Discipline: An Author Co-citation Analysis of Informatıon Science”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(4): 327-355.