Analyses of Scientific Collaboration Networks among Authors, Institutions, and Countries in FinTech Studies: A Bibliometric Review

FinTech Pub Date : 2024-04-17 DOI:10.3390/fintech3020015
Carson Duan
{"title":"Analyses of Scientific Collaboration Networks among Authors, Institutions, and Countries in FinTech Studies: A Bibliometric Review","authors":"Carson Duan","doi":"10.3390/fintech3020015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: FinTech research has grown rapidly, but few studies have measured the levels of scientific collaboration among authors, institutions, and nations. This study aimed to reveal the status and levels of scientific collaboration in this field. The results will help scholars to combine their knowledge and resources to generate new ideas that may not have been possible if they worked alone and enable them to work more efficiently, resulting in higher-quality results for all parties. Design/methodology/approach: Research papers in the FinTech field indexed in the Web of Science databases from 1999 to 2022 were included in the research dataset. Using R-bibliometrix and VOS viewer (Visualisation of Similarities viewer), co-authorship networks were drawn. Additionally, some measures of the co-authorship network were assessed, such as the links, total link strength, total number of articles, total citations, normalized total citations, average year of publication, average citations, and average normalized normal citations. Beyond bibliometric analyses, this research gathers other statistics for analysis to gain further insights. Result: A total of 1792 publications were identified, and a number of these revealed an increase in the forms of collaboration, including collaboration among authors and institutions. Three lists of the most collaborative authors, institutions, and countries were compiled. The top authors, affiliations, and countries were ranked according to their total links, citations, average citations, and annual normalized citations. There were six distinct clusters of collaboration among authors, thirteen among affiliations, and eleven among countries. In terms of author collaborations, the links and total link strength had three nodes and four nodes, respectively. John Goodell, Chi-Chuan Le, and Shaen Corbet were the top three collaborative authors. In terms of affiliations, the two strength attributes were 8 and 12 nodes, with Sydney University, Hong Kong University, and the Shanghai University of Finance and Economics topping the list. In terms of collaboration among countries, these two attributes had 14 and 34 nodes. Three of the most collaborative countries were England, the People’s Republic of China, and the United States. Originality/value: In contrast with previous systematic literature reviews, this study quantitatively examines the collaboration status in the FinTech field on three levels: authors, affiliations, and countries.","PeriodicalId":472258,"journal":{"name":"FinTech","volume":" 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"FinTech","FirstCategoryId":"0","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/fintech3020015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: FinTech research has grown rapidly, but few studies have measured the levels of scientific collaboration among authors, institutions, and nations. This study aimed to reveal the status and levels of scientific collaboration in this field. The results will help scholars to combine their knowledge and resources to generate new ideas that may not have been possible if they worked alone and enable them to work more efficiently, resulting in higher-quality results for all parties. Design/methodology/approach: Research papers in the FinTech field indexed in the Web of Science databases from 1999 to 2022 were included in the research dataset. Using R-bibliometrix and VOS viewer (Visualisation of Similarities viewer), co-authorship networks were drawn. Additionally, some measures of the co-authorship network were assessed, such as the links, total link strength, total number of articles, total citations, normalized total citations, average year of publication, average citations, and average normalized normal citations. Beyond bibliometric analyses, this research gathers other statistics for analysis to gain further insights. Result: A total of 1792 publications were identified, and a number of these revealed an increase in the forms of collaboration, including collaboration among authors and institutions. Three lists of the most collaborative authors, institutions, and countries were compiled. The top authors, affiliations, and countries were ranked according to their total links, citations, average citations, and annual normalized citations. There were six distinct clusters of collaboration among authors, thirteen among affiliations, and eleven among countries. In terms of author collaborations, the links and total link strength had three nodes and four nodes, respectively. John Goodell, Chi-Chuan Le, and Shaen Corbet were the top three collaborative authors. In terms of affiliations, the two strength attributes were 8 and 12 nodes, with Sydney University, Hong Kong University, and the Shanghai University of Finance and Economics topping the list. In terms of collaboration among countries, these two attributes had 14 and 34 nodes. Three of the most collaborative countries were England, the People’s Republic of China, and the United States. Originality/value: In contrast with previous systematic literature reviews, this study quantitatively examines the collaboration status in the FinTech field on three levels: authors, affiliations, and countries.
金融科技研究中作者、机构和国家之间的科学合作网络分析:文献计量学回顾
目的:金融科技研究发展迅速,但很少有研究对作者、机构和国家之间的科研合作水平进行衡量。本研究旨在揭示该领域科学合作的现状和水平。研究结果将有助于学者们整合知识和资源,产生单打独斗可能无法实现的新想法,并使他们能够更高效地工作,为各方带来更高质量的成果。设计/方法/途径:研究数据集包括 1999 年至 2022 年期间在 Web of Science 数据库中编入索引的金融科技领域的研究论文。使用 R-bibliometrix 和 VOS 查看器(相似性可视化查看器)绘制了共同作者网络。此外,还对共同作者网络的一些指标进行了评估,如链接、总链接强度、文章总数、总被引频次、归一化总被引频次、平均发表年份、平均被引频次和平均归一化正常被引频次。除文献计量分析外,本研究还收集了其他统计数据进行分析,以获得更多启示。研究结果共鉴定了 1792 篇出版物,其中一些出版物显示出合作形式的增加,包括作者之间和机构之间的合作。我们编制了三份合作最多的作者、机构和国家名单。根据总链接数、引用次数、平均引用次数和年度归一化引用次数对排名靠前的作者、机构和国家进行了排序。作者之间有六个不同的合作群组,机构之间有十三个合作群组,国家之间有十一个合作群组。在作者合作方面,链接和总链接强度分别有三个节点和四个节点。John Goodell、Chi-Chuan Le 和 Shaen Corbet 是前三位合作作者。在隶属关系方面,两个强度属性分别为 8 节点和 12 节点,悉尼大学、香港大学和上海财经大学位居前列。在国家间合作方面,这两个属性分别有 14 个和 34 个节点。合作最多的三个国家是英国、中华人民共和国和美国。原创性/价值:与以往的系统性文献综述不同,本研究从作者、所属机构和国家三个层面对金融科技领域的合作状况进行了定量研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信