Philosophy of Science

Investigating the status of scientific productions and the co-occurrence of words in the field of philosophy based on articles indexed in the Web of Science database

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

abolfazk asadnia 1
fatemeh makkizadeh 2
Fezeh Ebrahimi 3

1 Assistant professor, Department of knowledge and information science, Faculty of literature and humanities, Shahid Bahonar Kerman University.

2 Associate Professor, Department of knowledge and information science, Faculty of Social science, Yazd University

3 Phd in knowledge and information science, Employee of Yazd Public library Bureau

https://doi.org/10.30465/ps.2023.45262.1672
Abstract
Philosophy is the art and science of thinking and gaining into the world and things. It seems important to identify the research fields and the scope of its subjects. This research was done with the aim of achieving a comprehensive understanding of the process and thematic structure of articles in the field of philosophy. The current research is descriptive with a scientometric approach that analyzes the content of texts using the co-occurrence of words and social network analysis. The statistical population includes articles in the field of philosophy that have been published in the Web of Science database for the 5-year period of 2017-2021 in the citation index of arts and humanities. Finally, 4829 articles were selected in order to comprehensively outline the intellectual structure of knowledge in the field of philosophy. R bibliometrix package was used for data analysis and scientific map drawing. The analysis of the data showed that the greatest increase in published documents occurred in the last 3 years, Fischer was the most prolific author in recent years. America and England are the top two countries in terms of receiving citations in the scientific field of philosophy. The most prominent organization is the INST philosophy. Studies in the field of philosophy are divided into four clusters; Philosophical schools of thought and pragmatism clusters were clusters with high density and developed and experimental philosophy and philosophy clusters were central clusters with high centrality and undeveloped. According to the findings and the high frequency of Kant's keyword and the relationship between this keyword and other keywords, it can be concluded that Kant's opinions and ideas are still of great importance in philosophical discussions. Also, according to the extracted clusters, it was observed that these researches do not have a high variety and many neglected philosophical topics still exist.
By analyzing the topics related to the articles in the field of philosophy, scientific advances and trends in scientific cooperation in this field are highlighted, and this can help policy makers and researchers to understand the current state of philosophical research in addition to predicting and knowing the future.

Keywords

philosophy
Co-Word analysis
scientometrics
Web of Science
Scientific Productions
ابراهیمی، فضه؛ اسدنیا، ابوالفضل (1401). تحلیل علم­سنجی از مقالات آینده پژوهی منتشر شده در نشریات علمی ایران. آینده پژوهی دفاعی. 7 (27)،  35-63.
اژدر، علیرضا؛ زمانی، مهدی؛ علم الهدی، سیدعلی؛ و پناهی، اکبر (1391). تحلیلی بر نقد امر مطلق کانت. متافیزیک. 4 (13)، 79-94.
اسدنیا، ابوالفضل؛ شعبانی، احمد؛و دلایی میلان، علی (1395). بررسی و تحلیل زییست روش­های پژوهش کیفی در نشریات فارسی علم اطلاعات و دانش­شناسی. تعامل انسان و اطلاعات. 3 (1)، 56-66.
حاتمی، مهدیه؛ و نقشینه، نادر (1394). بررسی کمی و مصورسازی همکاری­های بین سازمانی در مدارک نمایه شده جمهوری اسلامی ایران در پایگاه استنادی اسکوپوس: از دیدگاه روابط دانشگاه-صنعت-دولت. پژوهشنامه علم­سنجی. 1 (1)، 69-92.
دستغیب، عبدالعلی؛ و بهداروند، اکبر (1386). اندیشه: جان لاک و فلسفه تجربی. کیهان فرهنگی. 257، 38-43.
سپهری، محمدمهدی؛ و ریاحی، نصرت (1389). کاربست تحلیل شبکه اجتماعی برای استخراج نیازهای سیستم مدیریت دانش در سازمان­های دانش بنیان. سیاست علم و فناوری. 3 (2)، 81-95.
سهیلی، فرامرز؛ شعبانی، علی؛ و خاصه، علی اکبر (1394). ساختار فکری دانش در حوزه رفتار اطلاعاتی: مطالعه هم­واژگانی. تعامل انسان و اطلاعات. 3 (4)، 21-36.
سهیلی، فرامرز؛ و منصوری، علی (1393). تحلیل شبکه هم­نویسندگی پژوهشگران شیمی ایران با استفاده از سنجه­های مرکزیت. مطالعات کتابداری و علم اطلاعات. 13، 89-106.
صدیقی، مهری (1393). بررسی و کاربرد روش تحلیل هم­رخدادی واژگان در ترسیم ساختار خوزه­های علمی (مطالعه موردی: حوزه اطلاع سنجی). پژوهشنامه پردازش و مدیریت اطلاعات. 30 (2)، 373-396.
عبدالکریم، سروش (1357). علم چیست؟ فلسفه چیست؟. تهران: انتشارات حکمت.
عصاره، فریده؛ توکلی زاده راوری، محمد؛ بیگدلی، زاهد؛ و قضاوی، رقیه (1397). مطالعه میزان شباهت اصطلاحات عنوان، کلید واژه­های نویسنده و موضوعات کنترل شده برای تعیین فیلد مناسب در تحلیل­های موضوعی علم­سنجی. مدیریت اطالعات سلامت. 15 (5)، 220-225.
مصباح یزدی، محمدتقی (1378). آموزش فلسفه. تهران: سازمان تبلیغات اسلامی، چاپ و نشر بین الملل.
Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of informetrics, 11(4), 959-975.
Bazm, S., Kalantar, S. M., & Mirzaei, M. (2016). Bibliometric mapping and clustering analysis of Iranian papers on reproductive medicine in Scopus database (2010-2014). International journal of reproductive biomedicine, 14(6), 371.
Chalmers, D. J. (2015). Why Isn't There More Progress in Philosophy? 1. Philosophy, 90(1), 3-31.
Chen, C., & Song, M. (2019). Visualizing a field of research: A methodology of systematic scientometric reviews. PloS one, 14(10), e0223994.
Chi, P. S., & Conix, S. (2022). Measuring the isolation of research topics in philosophy. Scientometrics, 127(4), 1669-1696.
Feenstra, R. A., & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2022). Philosophers’ appraisals of bibliometric indicators and their use in evaluation: from recognition to knee-jerk rejection. Scientometrics, 127(4), 2085-2103.
Gutiérrez-Rubio, D., Maz-Machado, A., León-Mantero, C., Madrid-Martín, M.J. (2019). A Scientometric study of The Journal of Philosophy of Education. International Journal of Development Research. 9 (3), 26754-26758.
Jokić, M. (2006). Scientometric Approach to Evaluation of Scientific Work in Philosophy. Prolegomena: Časopis za filozofiju, 5(1), 99-110.
Kaspar, D. (2015). Why isn't there more progress in philosophy?. Philosophy, 90(1), 59-81.‏
Li, J., Goerlandt, F., & Reniers, G. (2021). An overview of scientometric mapping for the safety science community: Methods, tools, and framework. Safety Science, 134, 105093.
Mooghali, A., Alijani, R., Karami, N., & Khasseh, A. A. (2012). Scientometric analysis of the scientometric literature. International Journal of Information Science and Management (IJISM), 9(1), 19-31.
Nalimov, V. V., & Mul'chenko, Z. M. (1971). Measurement of Science. Study of the Development of Science as an Information Process (No. FTD-MT-24-835-71). Foreign Technology Div Wright-Patterson AFB Ohio.
Price, D. (1963). Little science, big science, New York: Columbia University Press. Science, 149(3683), 10-515.
Sofyan, D., Abdullah, K. H., & Hafiar, H. (2022). The philosophy of sport and physical education: Four decade publication trends via scientometric evaluation. Physical Education Theory and Methodology, 22(3), 437-449.
Wouters, P., & Leydesdorff, L. (1994). Has Price's dream come true: Is scientometrics a hard science?. Scientometrics, 31, 193-222.
Hu, C.P., Hu, J.M., Deng, S.L., & Liu, Y. (2013). A co-word analysis of Library and Information Science in China. Scientometrics, 97(2), 369- 382.

Home

Guide for Authors

Submit Manuscript

Reviewers

Contact Us