Bibliometric Analysis of Articles on the Scientific Position of Tourism

Öz

The aim of the research is to analyze the articles on the scientific position of tourism, to determine its bibliometric characteristics and to determine the trends in the body of knowledge with a descriptive approach. In addition, according to the findings, it is aimed to create an evaluation on the reflections of the development of English articles on Turkish articles. For this purpose, 91 articles, which were determined by searching the Google Scholar and DergiPark Academic databases with the keywords of the research, were analyzed according to certain parameters. As a result, it has been seen that the examined articles have the quality of academic studies prepared based on the conceptual framework, English articles with a longer history in terms of formation form the basis of Turkish articles, and the intensity of the tendency towards the 'multidisciplinary' opinion in English articles is also reflected in the Turkish articles.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Science
• Theory
• Discipline
• Paradigm
• Tourism
• Bibliometric analysis

Turizmin Bilimsel Konumuyla İlgili Makalelerin Bibliyometrik Analizi

Öz

Bu araştırmanın amacı, turizmin bilimsel konumu ile ilgili makalelerin bibliyometrik özelliklerinin saptanması ve ilgili literatürdeki eğilimlerin betimleyici bir yaklaşımla belirlenmesidir. Ayrıca elde edilen bulgulara göre İngilizce makalelerin gelişiminin Türkçe makalelere olan yansımalarına ilişkin bir değerlendirmenin oluşturulması hedeflenmektedir. Bu amaç doğrultusunda, Google Scholar ve DergiPark Akademik veri tabanlarında araştırmanın anahtar kelimeleri ile yapılan tarama ile belirlenen 91 makale, belirli parametrelere göre analiz edilmiştir. Araştırma neticesinde, incelenen makalelere dayalı olarak oluşan kavramsal çerçevenin akademik çalışma niteliğine sahip olduğu, İngilizce makalelerden tarihsel olarak daha eski olanlarının Türkçe makalelere temel oluşturduğu ve turizmin bilimsel konumuna ilişkin görüşlerde ise İngilizce makalelerdeki ‘çok disiplinli’ görüşe yönelik eğilimin Türkçe literatüre de yansıdığı görülmüştür.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Bilim
• Teori
• Disiplin
• Paradigma
• Turizm
• Bibliyometrik analiz

Kaynakça

1. Ahipaşaoğlu, H. S. ve Arıkan, İ. (2003). Seyahat işletmeleri yönetimi ve ulaştırma sistemleri. Ankara: Detay Yayıncılık.
2. Akoğlan Kozak, M., Evren, S. ve Çakır, O. (2013). Tarihsel süreç içinde turizm paradigması. Anatolia: Turizm Araştırmaları Dergisi, 24(1), 7-22.
3. Bar-Ilan, J. (2008). Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century-a review. Journal of Informetrics, 2(1), 1-52.
4. Barca, M. (2011). Third academic tourism education conference: The scientific state of tourism as a discipline. Anatolia, 22(3), 428-430.
5. Bayram, Ö. G. (1998). Atıf verisi (citation data) ve enformetrik yasalar: Türk kütüphanecilik literatüründeki doktora tezleri üzerinde bir uygulama. Türk Kütüphaneciliği, 12(1), 21-32.
6. Butler, R. (2015). The evolution of tourism and tourism research. Tourism Recreation Research, 40(1), 16-27.
7. Butler, R. W. (2019). Tourism carrying capacity research: a perspective article. Tourism Review, 75(1), 207-211.
8. Butowski, L. (2011). Tourism-an academic discipline (discursive article). Turyzm, 21(1 (2)), 17-24.

9. Boyack, K. W. ve Klavans, R. (2010). Co‐citation analysis, bibliographic coupling, and direct citation: Which citation approach represents the research front most accurately?. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(12), 2389-2404.
10. Cooper, C., Fletcher, J., Gilbert, D. ve Wanhill, S. (1993). Tourism: Principles and practices. London: Pitman
11. Çallı, D. S. (2015). Turizm yazınında teorik çerçevede yaşanan tartışmalar ve turizmoloji üzerine nitel bir değerlendirme. Kastamonu Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 7(1), 135-142.
12. Darbellay, F. ve Stock, M. (2012). Tourism as a complex interdisciplinary research object. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(1), 441–458.
13. Dinçer, F. İ., Çetin, G., Demiroğlu, O. C., İzgi, M. T. ve Aslan, E. H. (2007). Turizmoloji Nedir? Turizmbilim Üzerine Yapılan Teorik Tartışmaları Değerlendiren Bir Analiz Çalışması. Çeşme Ulusal Turizm Sempozyumu, 21-23.
14. Echtner, C. M. ve Jamal, T. B. (1997). The disciplinary dilemma of tourism studies. Annals of Tourism Research, 21(4), 868–883.
15. Fennell, D. A. (2022). The tourism knowledge translation framework: bridging the canyon between theory and practice. Current Issues in Tourism, 25(5), 674-691.
16. Fletcher, J., Fyall, A., Gilbert, D. ve Wanhill, S. (2017). Tourism: Principles and practice. Londra: Pearson UK.
17. Franklin, A. ve M. Crang (2001). The trouble with tourism and travel theory?, Tourist Studies, 1(1): 5–22.
18. Goeldner, C. ve Ritchie, B. (2006). Tourism, Principles, Practices, Philosophies, New Jersey: John WileyveSons.
19. Gökçe, A. ve Batman, O. (2022). Turizm Formları: Terimsel Adlandırma Üzerine Nitel Bir Çalışma. Journal of New Tourism Trends, 3(1), 39-59.
20. Göksan, E. (1978). Turizmoloji. İzmir: Uğur Ofset. Gren, M. ve Huijbens, E. H. (2012). Tourism theory and the earth. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(1), 155-170.
21. Gülcan, B. (2009a). Turizmin disipliner evrimi. Ticaret ve Turizm Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, (1), 186-206.
22. Gülcan, B. (2009b). Türkiye’deki turizm akademisyenleri turizmi ayrı bir bilim dalı olarak kabul ediyorlar mı?. Ticaret ve Turizm Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 2, 1-20.
23. Güzeller, C. O. ve Çeliker, N. (2018). Bibliometric analysis of tourism research for the period 2007-2016. Advances in Hospitality and Tourism Research, 6(1), 1-22.
24. Hollinshead, K. (2010). Tourism studies and confined understanding: The call for a “new sense” postdisciplinary imaginary. Tourism Analysis, 15(4), 499-512.
25. Jafari, J. ve Ritchie, J. B. (1981). Toward a framework for tourism education: Problems and prospects. Annals of tourism research, 8(1), 13-34.
26. Jafari, J. (1990). Research and scholarship: The basis of tourism education, Journal of Tourism Studies, 1, 33-41.
27. Kalantzi, O., Tsiotas, D. ve Polyzos, S. (2016). The contribution of tourism in national economies: Evidence of Greece. EJBSS, 5, 41-64.
28. Kuhn, T. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: IL, University of Chicago Press.
29. Kozak, N. (1994). Anatolia Dergisi'nde yayımlanan yazılar üzerine bir inceleme. Anatolia: Turizm Araştırmaları Dergisi, 5(3), 22-33.
30. Kozak, M. (2014). Bilimsel araştırma: tasarım, yazım ve yayım teknikleri. Ankara: Detay Yayıncılık.
31. Kozak, M. ve Kozak, N. (2016). Institutionalisation of tourism research and education: From the early 1900s to 2000s. Journal of Tourism History, 8(3), 275-299.
32. Krishnan, A. (2009). What are academic disciplines? Some observations on the disciplinarity vs. interdisciplinarity debate. NCRM Working Paper Series, 3(9).
33. Laws, E. ve Scott, N. (2015). Tourism research: Building from other disciplines. Tourism recreation research, 40(1), 48-58.
34. Latour, B. (2000). When things strike back: a possible contribution of ‘science studies’ to the social sciences. The British journal of sociology, 51(1), 107-123.
35. Leiper, N. (1981). Towards a cohesive curriculum in tourism: The case for a distinct discipline. Annals of Tourism Research, 8(1), 69–84.
36. López-Bonilla, J. M. ve López-Bonilla, L. M. (2021). Leading disciplines in tourism and hospitality research: a bibliometric analysis in Spain. Current issues in tourism, 24(13), 1880-1896. Moscardo, G., Konovalov, E., Murphy, L. ve
37. McGehee, N. (2013). Mobilities, community well-being and sustainable tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 21(4), 532-556.
38. Moyle, B., Croy, G. ve Weiler, B. (2010). Tourism interaction on islands: the community and visitor social exchange. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research.
39. Munar, A. M., Pernecky, T. ve Feighery, W. (2016). An introduction to tourism postdisciplinarity. Tourism Analysis, 21(4), 343-347.
40. Mura, P. ve Wijesinghe, S. N. (2021). Critical theories in tourism–a systematic literature review. Tourism Geographies, 1-21.
41. Okumus, F., Van Niekerk, M., Koseoglu, M. A. ve Bilgihan, A. (2018). Interdisciplinary research in tourism. Tourism Management, 69, 540-549.
42. Pearce, P. L. (2004). Theoretical innovation in Asia Pacific tourism research. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 9(1), 57-70.
43. Pritchard, A. (1969). Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics. Journal of documentation, 25, 348.
44. Rangus, M. ve Brumen, B. (2016). Development of tourism research. Teorija in praksa, 53(4).
45. Repko, A. F. (2012). Interdisciplinary Research: Process and Theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing.
46. Sert, S. ve Nalçacı İkiz, A. (2012). Turizmin Bilimsel Konumuna İlişkin Akademisyenlerin Tutumları Üzerine Bir Araştırma. VI. Lisansüstü Turizm Öğrencileri Araştırma Kongresi, Ankara, s. 523-535.
47. Sharma, K. K. (2005). Tourism and development. New Delhi: Sarup ve Sons.
48. Solmaz, S. A. (2019). Turizmin Doğuşu: Sosyolojik Bir Olgu Olarak Turizm Nasıl Ortaya Çıktı? Journal of Social, Humanities and Administrative Sciences, 5(19), 867-882
49. Sommer, R. (2000). Discipline and field of study: A search for clarification. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 20(1), 1-4.
50. Song, Z. (2017). The debate between empirical and broader phenomenological approaches to research. Tourism Management, 58, 307-311.
51. Şahin, S., ve Acun, A. (2015). Turist rehberliği alanının bibliyometrik profili: Ulusal Turizm Kongreleri bildirileri. Balıkesir Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 18(34), 213-234.
52. Taillon, J.M. (2014). Understanding Tourism as an Academic Community, Study or Discipline. Journal of Tourism and Hospitality, 3, 1-5.
53. Thirkettle, A. ve Korstanje, M. E. (2013). Creating a new epistemiology for tourism and hospitality disciplines. International Journal of Qualitative Research in Services, 1(1), 13-34.
54. Toskay, T. (1983). Turizm: Turizm olayına genel yaklaşım. İstanbul: Der Yayınları.
55. Tribe, J. (1997). The indiscipline of tourism. Annals of tourism research, 24(3), 638-657.
56. Tribe, J. ve Xiao, H. (2011). Developments in tourism social science. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(1), 7-26.
57. Urry, J. (1990). The tourist gaze: Leisure and travel in contemporary societies. London: Sage.
58. Van den Besselaar, P., ve Heimeriks, G. (2001). Disciplinary, multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary: Concepts and indicators. In ISSI (pp. 705-716).
59. Wallin, J. A. (2005). Bibliometric methods: Pitfalls and possibilities. Basic & Clinical Pharmacology & Toxicology, 97(5), 261–275.
60. Wang, Y., Yu, Q. ve Fesenmaier, D. R. (2002). Defining the virtual tourist community: implications for tourism marketing. Tourism management, 23(4), 407-417.
61. Weaver, D. B. (2022). Tourisation Theory and the Pandiscipline of Tourism. Journal of Travel Research, 62(1), 259- 265.
62. Wiweka, K. ve Arcana, K. T. P. (2019). Rethinking the Theory of Tourism: What is Tourism System in Theoretical and Empirical Perspective?. Journal of Business on Hospitality and Tourism ,5 (2), 318-336.
63. Wu, B., Xiao, H., Dong, X., Wang, M. ve Xue, L. (2012). Tourism knowledge domains: A keyword analysis. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 17(4), 355-380.
64. Xiao, H., Li, M. ve Lin, E. C. K. (2011). Diffusion patterns and knowledge networks: An inductive analysis of intellectual connections in multidisciplinary tourism studies. Journal of Travel ve Tourism Marketing, 28(4), 405-422.
65. Xin, S., Tribe, J. ve Chambers, D. (2013). Conceptual research in tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 41, 66-88.
66. Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2013). Nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Seçkin Yayıncılık, Ankara.