Using mixed methods to map vaguely defined research areas

Lise Degn, Niels Mejlgaard and Jesper Wiborg Schneider

Research Evaluation, 2019, vol. 28, issue 4, 394-404

Abstract: The aim of this article is to present an alternative method for science mapping, which remedies some of the classic limitations to e.g. using co-citation analysis as a mapping tool. With the emergence of new, more complex and interdisciplinary areas of research it becomes important to adjust our understandings of how to study these areas, and the argument of the present paper is that in order to provide high-resolution maps of emerging scientific areas, we need to start in the ‘cognitive colleges’ of the research areas themselves. To do so, a mixed methods design with co-nomination as its backbone is proposed. The potential and limitations of the alternative approach to science mapping are discussed based on an empirical example of mapping an vaguely defined research area in Denmark.

Keywords: science mapping; complex research areas; mixed methods; co-nomination (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2019
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/reseval/rvz025 (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:rseval:v:28:y:2019:i:4:p:394-404.

Access Statistics for this article

Research Evaluation is currently edited by Julia Melkers, Emanuela Reale and Thed van Leeuwen

More articles in Research Evaluation from Oxford University Press
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().