Scientometric Analysis — Quantitative Study of Science
Scientometric Analysis of Scientific Literature · Also known as: scientometrics, science of science, quantitative science studies, research evaluation analysis
Scientometric analysis applies statistical and computational methods to publication and citation data to measure the growth, structure, and impact of scientific fields. Drawing on databases such as Web of Science, Scopus, or OpenAlex, it quantifies output trends, identifies leading authors and institutions, maps intellectual networks, and evaluates research impact — transforming large bibliographic corpora into evidence-based portraits of how knowledge develops and spreads.
Read the full method
Sign in with a free account to read this section.
Method map
The neighbourhood of related methods — select a node to explore.
+15 more
When to use it
Use scientometric analysis when the goal is to characterise the intellectual landscape of a field at scale — describing output growth, identifying influential actors, mapping knowledge clusters, or tracking how research themes evolve over decades. It is well-suited for research-policy evaluation, grant landscape reviews, journal benchmarking, and as a structured complement to systematic reviews that need a bibliographic overview. It requires access to a bibliographic database with citation data; fields poorly covered by Web of Science or Scopus (e.g., many humanities, grey literature) will yield incomplete pictures. Do not use it as a substitute for reading and synthesising the content of papers; it maps the structure of literature, not its meaning. Also avoid it when the corpus is too small (fewer than ~50 documents) for statistical indicators to be stable.
Strengths & limitations
- Handles corpora of thousands to hundreds of thousands of records — scales far beyond what manual review can cover.
- Produces reproducible, quantitative evidence on field structure, growth trends, and impact that supplements qualitative synthesis.
- Reveals hidden intellectual networks, collaboration patterns, and emerging research fronts through network analysis.
- Supports evidence-based science policy: funding allocation, journal selection, performance evaluation.
- Integrates with open-source tools (R bibliometrix, VOSviewer) enabling transparent, replicable workflows.
- Coverage bias: Web of Science and Scopus privilege English-language, peer-reviewed journal articles; books, conference proceedings, grey literature, and non-English outputs are underrepresented.
- Citation indicators conflate different reasons for citing — positive affirmation, correction, and negative citation are all counted equally.
- Author and institution disambiguation remains imperfect; common names and name-change events introduce errors in collaboration analyses.
- Indicators measure scientific activity, not quality — a high citation count reflects influence, not correctness.
Frequently asked
What is the difference between scientometrics and bibliometrics?
Bibliometrics is the broader term — it applies statistical methods to any type of document or communication (books, patents, social-media posts). Scientometrics is a subset focused specifically on science and technology literature and its relation to the development of scientific knowledge. In practice the terms are used interchangeably in many papers, but a purist would reserve 'scientometrics' for studies examining the structure and dynamics of science itself.
Which database should I use — Web of Science or Scopus?
Both are acceptable; the choice depends on your field. Web of Science has a longer historical index (back to 1900 for some collections) and is considered the standard in natural sciences and economics. Scopus covers more journals in social sciences and engineering and indexes slightly more titles overall. For maximum coverage, especially in multidisciplinary studies, using both and deduplicating is preferable. OpenAlex is a free open alternative with broad coverage that is increasingly used when access to commercial databases is limited.
How large does the corpus need to be for scientometric analysis to be meaningful?
There is no strict minimum, but most network-based indicators become unstable below approximately 50 documents. Co-citation and bibliographic coupling networks need at least several hundred records for clusters to emerge reliably. Production output and growth-trend analyses can be informative with smaller corpora, but map-based analyses require larger datasets. If the corpus is small, a systematic or narrative review of the actual content is likely more informative.
What tools are available for running scientometric analysis?
The most widely used tools are VOSviewer (free, Windows/Mac, GUI-based, specialised in bibliometric mapping), the R package bibliometrix (free, open-source, comprehensive indicators and maps), CiteSpace (free, Java-based, strong temporal trend detection), and Gephi (free, general network analysis). Commercial options include InCites (Clarivate) and SciVal (Elsevier), which integrate directly with their respective databases.
Is scientometric analysis a substitute for reading the papers?
No. Scientometrics maps the structure and influence of a body of literature; it does not synthesise the content or findings of individual studies. A high citation count tells you a paper is influential, not what it says or whether it is correct. For evidence synthesis — pooling findings across studies — use systematic review, meta-analysis, or qualitative meta-synthesis. Scientometrics is best used as a complement: a bibliographic landscape overview that helps orient subsequent content-focused synthesis.
Sources
- Nalimov, V. V., & Mulchenko, Z. M. (1969). Naukometriya: Izucheniye razvitiya nauki kak informatsionnogo protsessa [Scientometrics: The Study of the Development of Science as an Information Process]. Nauka. link ↗
- Pritchard, A. (1969). Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics? Journal of Documentation, 25(4), 348–349. link ↗
How to cite this page
ScholarGate. (2026, June 3). Scientometric Analysis of Scientific Literature. ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/en/scientometrics/scientometric-analysis
Which method?
Set this method beside its closest kin and read them side by side — the library lays the books on the table; the choice is yours.
- Bibliographic CouplingBibliometrics↔ compare
- Bibliometric AnalysisScientometrics↔ compare
- Co-Citation AnalysisBibliometrics↔ compare
- Co-word AnalysisScientometrics↔ compare
- Science MappingBibliometrics↔ compare
- Systematic Literature ReviewScientometrics↔ compare