Bibliometric analysis of Malaysian authorship: Trends, patterns, and prospects
List of Authors
  • Mohd Firdaus Roslan , Noor Syazwani Ishak

Keyword
  • Bibliometric Analysis, Malaysian Authorship, Trends, Patterns, Prospects

Abstract
  • Bibliometric analysis has emerged as a crucial instrument for interdisciplinary scholars who aim to comprehend the complex terrain of scientific knowledge. The current study employed a bibliometric analysis to scrutinise bibliometric publications by Malaysian authors. The bibliometric datasets utilised in this study were collected from the Scopus and Web of Science (WoS) databases. The obtained datasets were subjected to analysis and visualisation through the utilisation of ScientoPy and VOSviewer. The results suggest that Malaysian authors have actively participated in producing bibliometric papers in both Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus databases. Ahmi A. from Universiti Utara Malaysia and Lim W.M. from the Swinburne University of Technology, Sarawak, have published 27 and 25 works, making them the most prolific authors. The terms “CiteSpace”, “artificial intelligence”, “PRISMA”, “machine learning”, “systematic literature review”, “Biblioshiny”, “Bibliographic coupling”, and “performance analysis” have garnered significant attention in academic circles in 2022. This study presented that India and the United Kingdom exhibit parity in co-author affiliations with Malaysian authors. The most commonly employed author keywords by previous researchers were “bibliometric analysis”, “research evaluation”, “scientometrics”, “citation analysis”, and “co-authorship analysis”. Future research endeavours could concentrate on delving deeper into these subjects and scrutinising novel topics and domains of interest in bibliometric analysis.

Reference
  • 1. Abdullah, K. H. (2022). Publication Trends in Biology Education: A bibliometric review of 63 years. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 19(2), 465-480. https://www.tused.org/index.php/tused/article/view/1190 2. Abdullah, K. H., & Abd Aziz, F. S. (2020), Publication trends of safety knowledge research: a bibliometric. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 14(4), 927-945. https://www.ijicc.net/images/Vol_14/Iss_4/14460_Abdullah_2020_E_R.pdf 3. Abdullah, K. H., & Othman, S. Z. (2022). A bibliometric mapping of five decades research in telecommuting. International Journal of Information Science and Management (IJISM), 20(2), 229-245. https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.20088302.2022.20.2.14.9 4. Abdullah, K. H., & Sofyan, D. (2023). Machine learning in safety and health research: a scientometric analysis. International Journal of Information Science and Management (IJISM), 21(1), 17-37. https://doi.org/10.22034/ijism.2022.1977763.0 5. Abdullah, K. H., Roslan, M. F., & Ilias, M. (2023). A bibliometric analysis of literature review articles published by malaysian authors. Jurnal Penyelidikan Sains Sosial (JOSSR), 6(18), 8-26. http://www.jossr.com/PDF/JOSSR-2023-18-03-02.pdf 6. Ciesielski, T. H., Aldrich, M. C., Marsit, C. J., Hiatt, R. A., & Williams, S. M. (2017). Transdisciplinary approaches enhance the production of translational knowledge. Translational research, 182, 123-134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trsl.2016.11.002 7. Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285-296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070 8. González-Alcaide, G., Gorraiz, J., & Hervás Oliver, J. L. (2018). On the use of bibliometric indicators for the analysis of emerging topics and their evolution: Spin-offs as a case study. El profesional de la información, 27(3), 35-52. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2018.may.04 9. La Torre, G., Sciarra, I., Chiappetta, M., & Monteduro, A. (2017). New bibliometric indicators for the scientific literature: an evolving panorama. La Clinica terapeutica, 168(2), e65-e71. https://doi.org/10.7417/ct.2017.1985 10. Ma, C., Su, H., & Li, H. (2021). Global research trends on prostate diseases and erectile dysfunction: a bibliometric and visualized study. Frontiers in oncology, 10, 627891. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.627891 11. Moral-Muñoz, J. A., Herrera-Viedma, E., Santisteban-Espejo, A., & Cobo, M. J. (2020). Software tools for conducting bibliometric analysis in science: An up-to-date review. Profesional de la Información, 29(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2020.ene.03 12. Mukherjee, D., Lim, W. M., Kumar, S., & Donthu, N. (2022). Guidelines for advancing theory and practice through bibliometric research. Journal of Business Research, 148, 101-115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.04.042 13. Ponomariov, B.L., & Boardman, C. (2016). What is co-authorship? Scientometrics, 109, 1939-1963. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2127-7 14. Roslan, M. F., Abd Razak, M. R., Abdullah, K. H., Ishak, N. S., & Dani, R. (2023). A bibliometric perspective of safety awareness research in 48 years. International Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Research and Studies, 3(2), 922-928. https://www.multiresearchjournal.com/arclist.php?list=2023.3.2&id=1117 15. Roslan, M. Z. H., Sofyan, D., Oluwatoyin, I. M., Rojo, J. R., & Abdullah, K. H. (2022). A scientometric review of disaster education: Does it matter?. Journal of Metrics Studies and Social Science, 1(2), 101-111. https://doi.org/10.56916/jmsss.v1i2.241 16. Ruiz-Rosero, J., Ramírez-González, G., & Viveros-Delgado, J. (2019). Software survey: ScientoPy, a scientometric tool for topics trend analysis in scientific publications. Scientometrics, 121(2), 1165-1188. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03213-w 17. Serrano, L., Sianes, A., & Ariza-Montes, A. (2019). Using bibliometric methods to shed light on the concept of sustainable tourism. Sustainability, 11(24), 6964. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11246964 18. Sofian, F. N. R. M., Abdullah, K. H., & Mohd-Sabrun, I. (2023). Research on Corporate Reputation: A Bibliometric Review of 43 Years (1977-2020). International Journal of Information, 21(2), 31-54. https://doi.org/10.22034/ijism.2023.1977558.0 19. 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. https://doi.org/10.17309/tmfv.2022.3.20 20. Van Eck, N., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. scientometrics, 84(2), 523-538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3