Facebook Research: A Scientometric Assessment of Global Publications, 2005-14.
Gupta, B.M. ; Dhawan, S.M. ; Gupta, Ritu 等
Facebook Research: A Scientometric Assessment of Global Publications, 2005-14.
1. Introduction
Social networks have taken over our lives; that they are playing
significant role in shaping the dynamics of social interaction online
and improving our life experience on the internet. The popularity of
social networks is mainly attributed to the new ways that they offer for
social collaboration, community building, participation and sharing
information in virtual space. Facebook is the largest most popular
social networking site on the internet and mobile services commanding
close to 7 million visitors per month, twice as many visitors as Twitter
and Linkedin put together command. Mark Zuckerberg created it (then
called "Thefacebook") just when he was in his dorm room at
Harvard University (Markoff, 2007). Within 1 month of its creation, half
of the Harvard student population had signed up (Phillips, 2007).
Facebook quickly expanded the list of its approved networks, allowing
Facebook to reach a wider range of users. By 2005, Facebook allowed
access to over 800 college and university networks as well as
high-school networks (Arrington, 2005). In 2006, Facebook continued to
expand its network base, allowing access to over 22,000 commercial
organization networks (Zywica & Danowski, 2008). Its last major
network expansion occurred in 2006, which allowed access to anyone over
the age of 13 with a valid e-mail address. The rapid expansion of
approved networks was followed by a dramatic rise in user growth. Even
with such an incredible success, the growth of Facebook shows little
sign of abating. By expanding globally as well as attracting a wider
range of age groups, Facebook has been able to continue to maintain its
rapid growth. Facebook originated in the United States, but more than
80% of current Facebook users now live outside the United States.
Majority of new growth is occurring internationally, with Facebook
available in over 70 languages. Facebook has 936 million daily active
users on an average for March 2015, 798 million mobile daily active
users on an average for March 2015, 1.44 billion monthly active users as
of March 31, 2015, 1.25 billion mobile monthly active users as of March
31, 2015. Approximately 82.8% of our daily active users are outside the
US and Canada. (Facebook, 2015) As Facebook continues to grow around the
world, language is becoming an increasingly important factor for
marketers striving to reach their local and global audience. The social
network is highly localized and is currently available in over 70
languages [1-5]
Since its creation in February 2004, Facebook has become a
spectacular success by creating a massive new domain in which millions
of social interactions are played out every day. This burgeoning new
sphere of social behavior is inherently fascinating, but it also
provides scholars with an unprecedented opportunity to observe behavior
in a naturalistic setting, test hypotheses in a novel domain, and
recruit participants efficiently from many countries and demographic
groups [6-7]. There are many reasons for relevance of Facebook as a
topic for research to research scholars. Activities registered on
Facebook (e.g., connecting to others, expressing preferences, providing
status updates) leave a wealth of concrete, observable data, with
potential to provide many opportunities for studying human behavior
previously that were difficult to assess (e.g., making friends,
chatting). Social scientists are sometimes accused of failing to examine
actual behavior, relying instead on hypothetical or retrospective
self-reports of behavior [8-9].
Facebook became popular because of social factors, such as the
rapid uptake of social media by younger age groups; economic factors
such as the increasing affordability of computers and software, and
growing commercial interest in social media sites. Facebook can be used
anywhere, at any time, where an Internet connection is available.
Facebook being popular across a broad spectrum of demographic groups and
in many different countries, it has the potential to offer a unique
source of information about human behavior with levels of ecological
validity that are hard to match in most common research settings.
Facebook and other online social networks are interesting topics to
social scientists. This is because in addition to reflecting existing
social processes, they also spawn new ones by changing the way hundreds
of millions of people relate to one another and share information. Also
the rise of online social networks brings both new benefits and dangers
to society, which warrants careful consideration. The benefits
associated with Facebook, such as the strengthening of social ties, are
tempered by concerns about privacy and information disclosure [7]. As
Facebook becomes increasingly integrated into everyday life, it becomes
necessary to monitor and examine the platform's positive and
negative impacts on society.
Scholars from a wide variety of disciplines--ranging from law,
economics, sociology, and psychology, to information technology,
management, marketing, and computer-mediated communication--have
recognized the importance of Facebook as a topic for research [7].
It was observed that much of research studies undertaken on
Facebook covered issues relating to politics, political process, social
movements and business performance. Of the business issues, marketing,
organizational performance and efficacy, brand management, and consumer
behavior were found to be popular Facebook research topics. Because of
their distinct disciplinary affiliations and research goals, research
scholars had followed largely independent paths in understanding
Facebook research issues and published their findings in a broad range
of national and international journals and conference proceedings.
Though each discipline-bound study was indeed interesting and valuable
in its own right but these studies sough to provide only a narrow view
of what is known about Facebook. Besides, online social networks varied
dramatically in the breadth of their coverage. Some of the articles
focused exclusively on Facebook issues, whereas several others covered
Facebook in the context of other online social networks [10].
1.1 Literature Review
The literature review suggests that only a few studies are
currently available on quantitative assessment of literature and that
these studies focussed mainly on social media, not on Facebook research
per se. Among such available studies, Coursaris, and Van Osch (11)
examined 610 global publications on social media covering the period
Oct.2004 - Dec.2012 and determined the contribution and citation impact
of individuals, institutions and countries. The findings suggest
explosion in publication productivity, identification of leading
authors, institutions, countries and of a small set of foundational
papers. Social media as a domain displays limited diversity but it is
heavily influenced by practitioners. Gan and Wang [12] made a
bibliometric assessment of 646 global publications in social media
research that had appeared in journals under the subject category
"Information Science & Library Science" of the Social
Science Citation Index. The authors studied distribution of publications
output by descriptors, countries, journals, authorships and author
keywords and used this distributed data to evaluate research performance
and determine research trends. Basak and Calisir [13] made a
bibliometric evaluation of the publications (4714) related to Facebook
during 2005-13. The annual number of publications increased from 1 in
2005 to 1823 in 2013. The United States was found to be the most
productive country and English was the most frequently used language
among all publications. Moreover, Computers in Human Behavior was the
main distribution channel. Besides, engineering, business and economics,
and education were the top three most popular research areas.
The literature review on the application of Facebook to different
subject fields presented below underlines that the view that many of
these studies were focused more on content analysis as a means for trend
monitoring in Facebook research. The review highlights the view that not
even a single study had so far appeared on bibliometric analysis of
Facebook research.
Wilson, Gosling and Graham [7] reviewed 412 articles on application
of Facebook research to social sciences, sorted them into 5 categories:
descriptive analysis of users, motivations for using Facebook, identity
presentation, the role of Facebook in social interactions, and privacy
and information disclosure. Caers, Couck, Stough, Vigna and Dt Bois [14]
reviewed articles on Facebook research during 2006-12. They pointed out
how many of the articles suffer from limited scope (in terms of small
sample size as well as in the number of countries included in the
studies) and secondly how frequent changes to Facebook's design and
features make it is necessary to revisit many of these articles and
integrate their research findings. They also provided a critical
discussion and directions for future research. Blachnio, Przepiorka and
Rudnicka [15] presented the main trends in Facebook research and
explored topics in Facebook research. These include studies that
concentrate on personality and individual differences among users, the
role of self-efficacy, and motivation for using Facebook. There is a
growing trend in empirical studies that focuses on testing advanced
theoretical models of Facebook usage determinants. Technology acceptance
model, presented in this article, is one of the most often used among
them. This kind of approach may serve as a suggestion for a
methodological conceptualization in the future confirmatory research on
Facebook. Aydin [16] reviewed of Facebook research in the area of
education and presented results under six sections: Facebook users;
reasons people use Facebook; harmful effects of Facebook; Facebook as an
educational environment; Facebook's effects on culture, language,
and education; and the relationship between Facebook and subject
variables. It concluded there has been a serious lack of research on
Facebook's use as an educational resource. Current literature
reflects how Facebook might be utilized more readily in the educational
environment. According to Tess [17], social media (including Facebook
and Twitter) are increasingly becoming visible in higher education
settings as instructors look to technology to mediate and enhance their
instruction as well as promote active learning for students. Many
scholars argue for the purposeful integration of social media as an
educational tool. Most of the existing research on the utility and
effectiveness of social media in the higher education class is limited
to self-reported data (e.g., surveys, questionnaires) and content
analyses. Cvijki and Michahelles [18] i categorized Facebook public
posts under three trend monitoring topics: 'disruptive
events', 'popular topics' and 'daily routines'.
They compared the distribution and diffusion of Facebook posts under
these categories to determine their characteristics and understand
emerging trends on Face book. Warren., Sulaiman and Jaafar [19] findings
indicate that activists are using Facebook to shape the traditional
civic engagement landscape in an online realm. Future opportunities for
this stream of research are then discussed. The analysis was based on
the five criteria of Internet activism, i.e. collection of information;
publication of information; dialogue; coordinating actions and lobbying
for decision makers. The results revealed that activists are using
Facebook to seek information, check on others, follow links, post civic
messages, promote social events, appeal for donations, call for
volunteers, discuss social issues, schedule plans and advocate change.
2. Objectives
The main objectives of this paper are to study Facebook research
performance based on publications covered in Scopus database during
2005-14. In particular, the study focused on the following objectives:
1. To study the annual growth and distribution of world literature
on Facebook by document type and publication sources;
2. To study the citation pattern of the global research output;
3. To study the contribution, global share and citation impact of
top 10 most productive countries;
4. To study the distribution of global research output by broad
subject areas and identification of significant keywords;
5. To study the publication productivity and citation impact of top
20 most productive organizations and top 15 most productive authors;
6. To study the leading medium of communication
3. Methodology
The study sourced the Scopus database (http://www.scopus.com) for
world publication data on Facebook research covering the period 2005-14.
The search statement was formulated using "Facebook" keyword
in "title, abstract and keyword" tag and restricting the
search output to the period 2005-14 in "date range tag". The
main search statement formulated is as shown below. The main search
string was further restricted to 10 most productive countries one by one
in "country tag" to retrieve stats on their publication data.
The main search string was also restricted to "subject area
tag", "country tag", "source title tag", and
"affiliation tag" to gather data on publications distribution
by subject, collaborating countries, organization-wise and journal-wise,
etc. The citation data was collected from date of publication till the
end of April 2015. The study used a few indicators, including Relative
Citation Index, which is defined as the ratio of global share of
citations to the global share of publications.
(((TITLE-ABS-KEY ("RFID" OR "Radio Frequency
Identification") AND SRCTITLE ("library*" OR
"libraries")) AND PUBYEAR > 2001 AND PUBYEAR < 2015) OR
((TITLE-ABS-KEY ("RFID" OR "Radio Frequency
Identification") AND KEY ("library*" OR
"libraries")) AND PUBYEAR > 2001 AND PUBYEAR < 2015) OR
((TITLE-ABS-KEY ("RFID" OR "Radio Frequency
Identification") AND TITLE ("library *" OR
"libraries")) AND PUBYEAR > 2001 AND PUBYEAR < 2015))
Data Analysis & Results
The study sourced Scopus database (http://www.scopus.com) for world
publications data on Facebook research covering the period 2005-2014. In
all, Facebook research output rose from 2 papers in the year 2005 to 670
in 2010 and to 1877 in 2014, cumulating to a world total of 7916 papers
published in 10 years.
The Facebook research witnessed 98.26% CAGR growth based on 10
years data 2005-14. However, five-year publication data series covering
Facebook research during 2005-09 and 2010-14 differ significantly in
their growth rates. Facebook growth declined from 219.9% CAGR during
2005-09 to 10.53% CAGR during the subsequent quinquennial period 2010-15
(Table 1, Figure 1). Of the total publications output on Facebook
research, 49.30% (3586) appeared as articles, 40.83% (3240) as
conference papers, 3.37% (267) as reviews, 2.70% (22214) as book
chapters, 1.65% (131) as articles in press, 1.40% (111) as short
surveys, 1.35% (107) as notes , 1.25% (99) as conference reviews, 0.91%
(72) as books and the rest as letters, editorial and erratums during
2005-14.
4.1 Distribution Pattern of Citations
Facebook research which cumulated to 7916 papers during 2005-14
received a total of 44543 citations during 2005-14, averaging 5.59
citations per publication in 1 to 10 years citation window. It must be
noted that citations to 7916 publications were counted since their
publication year till June 2015. Their citation window years therefore
varied from 1 to 10 years. For example, a paper published, say, in the
year 2005 had 10 years citation window whereas another paper published,
say, in the year 2014 had just 1-year citation window (Table 1, Figure
1).
The citation quality differed from paper to paper; their citation
frequencies varied from one to above 100 per paper. Nearly 61.41% output
did not get any citations (zero citation). The rest 38.59% of cited
publications were distributed as least-cited to
very-highly-cited-papers. Nearly 28.89% publications accounted for
18.12% citations share and their citation rate varied from 1 to 10
citations per paper. 4.46% publications accounted for 11.47% citations
share and their citation rate varied from 11 to 20 citations per paper.
1.81% publications accounted for 7.97% citations share and their
citation rate varied from 21 to 30 citations per paper. 0.77%
publications accounted for 4.61% citations share and their citation rate
varied from 31 to 40 citations per paper. 0.48% publications accounted
for 4.03% citations share and their citation rate varied from 41 to 50
citations per paper. 1.26% publications accounted for 15.48% citations
share and their citation rate varied from 51 to 100 citations per paper.
Only 0.92% publications accounted for 38.32% citation share with
citations rate above 100 citations per paper (Table 2, Figure 2). Papers
with citations 100 or more are rated as highly cited papers.
4.2 Scientometric Profile of Top 10 Most Productive Countries
In all, 109 countries contributed to Facebook research during
2005-14. Some are high productivity countries while others are low
productivity ones in Facebook research. Top 10 countries which
contributed above 100 publications each are rated as high productivity
countries. Individually they published 191 to 2861 publications and
together they contributed 7916 publications (70.01% share) and 44283
citations (88.80% citations share) during 2005-14. Low productivity
countries included 58 which contributed 1-10 publications each, 15
countries which contributed 11-20 publications each, 7 countries which
contributed 21-30 publications each, and so on.
The 10 most productive countries varied widely in publications
share from 2.41% to 36.14% during 200514. The USA accounted for the
largest share (36.14%), followed by U.K (7.17%), Australia (4.71%),
Germany (4.16%), Canada, Taiwan, China (from 3.16% to 3.45%), Spain,
Italy and India (from 2.41% to 2.78%). The top 10 most productive
countries averaged their citation impact to 5.59 citations per paper.
Only three countries scored citation impact above the group average of
5.59: USA (9.65), Canada (8.62) and U.K. (5.99). Three countries scored
RCI above world average of 1: USA (1.72), Canada (1.54) and U.K. (1.07).
Three countries contributed highly cited papers above the group average
share of 1 %: USA (1.85%), Canada (1.83%) and Germany (1.22%). Seven
countries contributed international collaborative papers above the
average share of 21.89%: China (41.20%), Spain (32.27%), Canada
(31.14%), Italy (30.52%), Germany (30.40%), U.K. (28.35%) and Australia
(25.20%) (Table 3)
4.3. Subject-Wise Distribution of Publications
The global publications on Facebook research during 2005-14 were
grouped under nine subject sub-fields (as reflected in Scopus database
classification). Computer science accounts for the largest publications
share (53.08%) followed by social sciences (30.99%), engineering
(12.83%), medicine (11.04%), business, management & accounting
(9.66%), psychology (7.38%), arts & humanities (7.34%), decision
science (2.85%) and economics, econometrics & finance (2.60%) during
2005-14.
The quinquennial research activity, as measured using activity
index, witnessed jump in engineering field above the world average of
100 (from 89.54 to 105.80), as against drop below the world average in
other fields such as in computer science (from 104.98 to 97.25), social
sciences (from 113.85 to 92.34), business, management & accounting
(from 163. 81 to 64.71) and biochemistry, genetics & molecular
biology (140.41 to 77.65) from 2002-08 to 2009-14. Amongst five
subjects, computer science registered the highest citation impact per
paper (5.02), followed by social sciences (3.97 biochemistry, genetics
& molecular biology (2.13), engineering (1.68) and business,
management & accounting (1.50) during 200214 (Table 4)
4.4 Scientometric Profile of Top 20 Organizations
The top 20 most productive organizations engaged in Facebook
research were compared on a series of indicators such as publications
share, citations share, average citations per paper, h-index, and
average share in international collaborative papers. The top 20 most
productive organization contributed papers 34 to 70 publications each.
Together these organizations contributed 11.55% (914) publications share
and 26.68% (11884) citation share during 2005-14. The scientometric
profile of these 20 organizations is presented in Table 5. Top eight
organizations contributed publications output above the group average of
45.7: Michigan State University, USA (70 publications), Carnegie Mellon
University, USA (69 publications), Cornell University, USA (54
publications), Pennsylvania State University, USA (53 publications),
Microsoft Research, USA (52 publications, University of Maryland, USA
(51 publications), University of Wisconsin at Madison, USA (49
publications) and University of Texas at Austin (46 publications). Top
five organizations registered citation impact above the group average of
13 citations per publication: Michigan State University, USA (52.74),
University of Texas at Austin (24.87), Carnegie Mellon University, USA
(14.40), University of Maryland, USA (13.35) and University of
California, Irvine, USA (13.28) during 2005-14. Top eleven organizations
scored h-index above the group average h-index (9.7): Michigan State
University, USA (14), Carnegie Mellon University, USA, University of
Maryland, USA and Cornell University, USA (12 each), University of Texas
at Austin, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA, Stanford University,
(11 each) SA and University of Wisconsin at Madison, USA (11 each),
Pennsylvania State University, USA and Microsoft Research, USA (10 each)
during 2005-14. Top eight organizations contributed international
collaborative publications above the group average share of 19.47%:
University of Cambridge, U.K. (53.66%), Nanyang Technological
University, Singapore (34.28%), National University of Singapore
(31.59%), Microsoft Research, USA (30.77%), University of California,
Irvine, USA (28.20%), University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA
(23.53%), Stanford University, USA (21.43%), and Georgia Institute of
Technology, USA (21.05%) during 2005-14.
4.5 Sceintometric Profile of Top 15 Authors
The top 15 most productive authors engaged in Facebook research
were compared on a series of indicators such as publications share,
citations share, average citations per paper, h-index, and average share
in international collaborative papers. The top 15 most productive
authors published 11 to 26 publications each and together they
contributed 2.89% (229) publication share and 18.16% (8089) citation
share. The scientometric profile of these 15 authors is presented in
Table 6. Top five authors contributed above the group average (15.3):
N.B. Ellison (26 publications), C. Lampe (24 publications), M.A. Morena
(22 publications), M. Kosinski and J. Vitak (18 publications each)
during 2005-14. Top two authors registered citation impact above the
group average of 35.32 citations per publication: C. Lampe (124.9) and
N.B. Ellison (116.8) during 2005-14. Top seven authors scored h-index
above the group average of 5.73: N.B. Ellison (11), C. Lampe (10), M.A.
Morena (8), J Han (7), B.Y. Zhao, J. Vitak and S.D. Young (6 each)
during 2005-14. Top five authors contributed international collaborative
publications above the group average share of 22.70%: D. Stillwell
(92.31%), M. Kosinski (77.78%), H. Krasnova (69.23%), B.Y. Zhao (33.33%)
and S. Lawson (25.00%) during 2005-14.
4.6 Medium of Research Publication
Of the total 7916 papers, 3929 papers appeared in journals, 2806 in
conference proceedings, 562 in book series, 321 in trade publications,
296 as books and 2 undefined during 2005-14. The 3929 journal papers
appeared in several journals, of which the top 20 most productive
journals contributed 8.70% (689 papers) share. The quinquennial share of
global publications covered in top 20 journals increased from 6.55%
during period 2005-09 to 8.90% during 2010-14. The list of 20 most
productive journals is shown in Table
7. The largest number of papers (175) was published in Computers in
Human Behavior, followed by Cyberpsychology, Behavior & Social
Networking (80 papers), First Monday (51), Journal of Medical Internet
Research (49 papers), New Media and Society (34 papers), Public
Relations Review and Information Communication & Society (30 papers
each), etc.
4.7 Most Significant Keywords
Top 76 most frequently used keywords for searching global
literature on Facebook research were identified. These are listed in
Table 8 along with frequency of their publications hits. The frequency
of publications hits was the largest for the keyword Facebook (3540)
followed by Online social networks (3279), social networks (2069),
social media (1556), internet (1025), social networking site (794),
students (427), etc.
Summary & Conclusion
The world output on Facebook research cumulated to 7916
publications over 10 years during 2005-14. Facebook research witnessed
98.26% compounded annual growth during this 10 publication years.
However, five-year publication data series covering Facebook research
during 2005-09 and 2010-14 differ significantly in their growth rates.
Facebook growth declined from 219.9% CAGR during 2005-09 to 10.53% CAGR
during the subsequent quinquennial period 2010-15. Such a sharp decline
in Facebook growth should be a matter of great concern; it calls for
understanding the reasons underlying this sort of change in growth
trend. The world publications output on Facebook research is highly
skewed. For instance, top 10 most productive countries (USA, U.K.,
Australia, Germany, Canada, Taiwan, China, Spain, Italy and India)
together accounted for as much as 70% world publications share and 88%
world citations share. The USA has emerged as the world leader in
Facebook research (with 36.14% share, the largest by any country). In
all, more than 100 countries participated in Facebook research during
2005-14. Analysis of citation data on Facebook research reveals that
over 1/3rd (38.59%) publications were cited since their publication year
till April 15, 2015. Secondly, citation quality of Facebook research
differed widely from paper to paper. The top 0.92% publications received
100 and above citations per paper and it accounted for the highest
(38.32%) citations share, whereas 28.89% publications (which received
from 1 to 10 citations per paper) accounted for low citations share, as
low as 18.12%. Computer science accounts for the largest publication
share of 53.08%, followed by social sciences (30.99%), engineering
(12.83%), medicine (11.04%), business, management & accounting
(9.66%), psychology (7.38%), arts & humanities (7.34%), decision
science (2.85%) and economics, econometrics & finance (2.60%) during
2005-14.
Even as Facebook research distribution by country of publication
stands skewed, but publications output by participating organizations
connotes a different distribution trend. Facebook research publications
are widely scattered across participating organizations. For instance,
top 20 most productive organizations in Facebook research barely
accounted for 11.55% share (914 publications) and 26.68% citations share
(11884 citations) during 2005-14. Besides, research output also stood
widely scattered even at the level of contributing authors. For
instance, top 15 most productive authors in Facebook research barely
accounted for small 2.89% share (229 publications) and 18.16% citation
share (8089 citations). This sort of scattering of Facebook research
publications across participating organizations as well as contributing
authors seeks to highlight a point that centres of excellence in
Facebook research have yet to emerge.
Practical recommendations: The study finds that there has been a
serious lack of interest in utilizing Facebook as an educational
resource. The study recommends exploring the role of Facebook in the
education sector, and suggests using Facebook as a social network
analysis tool and as an educational resource.
References
[1.] Markoff, John. The tangled history of Facebook. 31 August
2007. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/31/
business/worldbusiness/31iht-facebook.5.7340806.html? r=0 (Accesses on
June 24, 2015)
[2.] Phillips, Sarah. A brief history of Facebook.25 July 2007.
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2007/iul/25/media.newmedia
(Accesses on June 24, 2015)
[3.] Arrington, Michael. 85% of college students use Facebook.7
September 2005 http://techcrunch.com/startups/.(Accesses on June 24,
2015)
[4.] Jolene Zywica and James Danowski. The Faces of Facebookers:
Investigating Social Enhancement and Social Compensation Hypotheses;
Predicting Facebook[TM] and Offline Popularity from Sociability and
SelfEsteem, and Mapping the Meanings of Popularity with Semantic
Networks. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication October 2008,
14(1), 1-34
[5.] Facebook: Our Mission. 2015.
http://newsroom.fb.com/company-info/
[6.] Top 10 Fastest Growing Facebook Languages. 16 November 2012.
http://www.socialbakers.com/blog/1064-top-10-fastest-growing-facebook-languages
[7.] Wilson, Robert E, Gosling, Samuel D, and Graham, Lindsay, T. A
Review of Facebook Research in the Social Sciences Perspectives on
Psychological Science 2012, 7(3) 203-220
[8.] Baumeister, R. F., Vohs, K. D., & Funder, D. C. Psychology
as the science of self-reports and finger movements: Or, whatever
happened to actual behavior? Perspectives on Psychological Science 2007,
2, 396-403
[9.] Graham, L. T., Sandy, C. J., & Gosling, S. D. (2011).
Manifestations of individual differences in physical and virtual
environments. In T. Chamorro-Premuzic, S. von Stumm, & A. Furnham
(Eds.), Handbook of individual differences (pp. 773-800). Oxford,
England: Wiley-Blackwell
[10.] Chris Piotrowski. Emerging research on social media use in
education: a study of dissertations. Research in Higher Education
Journal January 2015, 27, 1-12. http://www.aabri.com/ manuscripts/
142097.pdf
[11.] Coursaris, Constantinos K and Van Osch, Wietske. A
scientometric analysis of social media research (2004-2011).
Scientometrics October 2014, 101(1), 357-389
[12.] Gan, Chunmei and Wang, Weijun. A Bibliometric Analysis of
Social Media Research from the Perspective of Library and Information
Science. Digital Services and Information Intelligence. IFIP Advances in
Information and Communication Technology 2014, 445, 23-32
[13.] Basak, Ecem and Calisir, Fethi. Publication trends in
Facebook: A scientometric study. International Conference on Trends in
Economics, Humanities and Management (ICTEHM'15) March 27-28, 2015
Singapore
[14.] Caers, R, De Feyter, T, De Couck, M, Stough, T, Vigna, C and
Dt Bois, C. Facebook: A literature survey. International Journal of
Human-Computer Interactions November 2013, 29(11), 775-787
[15.] Blachnio, A, Przepiorka, A and Rudnicka, P. Psychological
determinants of using Facebook: A research review. Journal of Behavioral
Addictions September 2014, 3(3), 133-148
[16.] Aydin, S. A review of research on Facebook as an educational
environment.. Computers in Human Behavior 2013, 29(5), A 60-A68.
[17.] Tess, P.A. The role of social media in higher education
classes (real and virtual): A literature review. Journal of Medical
Internet Research February 2014, 16(2)
[18.] Cvijkj, I.P. and Michahelles, F. Monitoring trends on
Facebook. Social Science Computer Review February 2010, 28(1), 75-92
[19.] Warren, A.M., Sulaiman, A and Jaafar, N.I. Facebook: The
enabler of online civic engagement for activists. Government Information
Quarterly October 2012, 29(4), 480-91
B M Gupta
National Institute of Science, Technology & Development
Studies, Dr K.S.Krishnan Marg, New Delhi 110 012, India
[email protected]
S M Dhawan
National Physical Lab., New Delhi, India
[email protected]
Ritu Gupta
Shri Venkateswar University, Tirupati
[email protected]
Meena Jalana
Center for Research in Rural & Industrial Development,
Chandigarh
[email protected]
Caption: Figure 1: Growth of Publications on Facebook Research and
Citations during 2005-2014
Table 1.Growth of
Publications and Citations on
Facebook Research, 2005-14
Period TP TC ACPP
2005 2 422 211
2006 11 394 35.8
2007 56 209 3.73
2008 209 5770 27.6
2009 394 6687 17
2010 670 8791 13.1
2011 1138 7833 6.88
2012 1623 7079 4.36
2013 1936 3549 1.83
2014 1877 3549 1.89
2005- 672 1348 20.1
09 CAGR = 2
219.9
%
2010- 7244 3080 4.25
14 CAGR = 1
10.53%
2005- 7916 4428 5.59
14 CAGR = 3
98.26%
TP=Total Papers; TC=Total
Citations; ACPP=Average Citations
Per Paper
Table 2. Distribution of Papers and Citations on Facebook during 2005-14
Citations No. of No. of Percentage Percentage of
Range Papers Citations of Papers Citations
0 4861 0 61.41 0
1-10 2287 8070 28.89 18.12
11-20 353 5108 4.46 11.47
21-30 143 3552 1.81 7.97
31-40 61 2052 0.77 4.61
41-50 38 1796 0.48 4.03
51-100 100 6897 1.26 15.48
>100 73 17068 0.92 38.32
Total 7916 44543 100 100
Table 3. Scientometric Profile of Top 10 Most Productive Countries on
Facebook Research, 2005-14.
Country TP TC ACPP %TP %TC RCI HI ICP
USA 2861 27604 9.65 36.14 62.34 1.72 74 451
U.K. 568 3402 5.99 7.175 7.68 1.07 26 161
Australia 373 1737 4.66 4.712 3.92 0.83 23 94
Germany 329 1679 5.10 4.156 3.79 0.91 17 100
Canada 273 2352 8.62 3.449 5.31 1.54 19 85
Taiwan 264 623 2.36 3.335 1.41 0.42 13 45
China 250 826 3.30 3.158 1.86 0.59 14 103
Spain 220 420 1.91 2.779 0.95 0.34 10 71
Italy 213 523 2.46 2.691 1.18 0.44 11 65
India 191 159 0.83 2.413 0.36 0.15 6 38
World 7916 44283 5.59 21.3 1213
Country %ICP HCP %HCP
USA 15.76 53 1.85
U.K. 28.35 5 0.88
Australia 25.2 2 0.54
Germany 30.4 4 1.22
Canada 31.14 5 1.83
Taiwan 17.05 0 0
China 41.2 1 0.4
Spain 32.27 0 0
Italy 30.52 0 0
India 19.9 0 0
World 21.89 70
TP=Total Papers; TC=Total Citations; ACPP=Average Citations Per Paper;
RCI=Relative Citation Index; HI= h-index; ICP=International
Collaborative Papers; HCP=High Cited Papers
Table 4. Subject -Wise Distribution of Papers on Facebook Research,
2005-14
S.No Broad Subject TP TC ACPP HI %TP
1 Computer Science 4202 22232 5.29 65 53.08
2 Social Sciences 2453 14679 5.98 26 30.99
3 Engineering 1016 3147 3.10 22 12.83
4 Medicine 874 6846 7.83 10 11.04
5 Business, Management & 765 4792 6.26 6 9.66
Accounting
6 Psychology 584 8643 14.80 21 7.38
7 Arts & Humanities 581 2692 4.63 2 7.34
8 Decision Science 226 738 3.26 1 2.85
9 Economics, Econometrics 206 1038 5.04 1 2.60
& Finance
Total of the World 7916
TP=Total Papers; TC=Total Citations; ACPP=Average Citations Per Paper;
HI=h-index
Table 5. Scientometric profile of 20 Top Most Productive Organizations
on Facebook, 2005-14
S.No Name of the Organization TP TC ACPP HI
1 Michigan State University, 70 3692 52.74 14
USA
2 Carnegie Mellon University, 69 994 14.40 12
USA
3 Cornell University, USA 54 584 10.81 12
4 Pennsylvania State University, 53 473 8.92 10
USA
5 Microsoft Research, USA 52 365 7.02 10
6 University of Maryland, USA 51 681 13.35 12
7 University of Wisconsin at 49 389 7.94 11
Madison, USA
8 University of Texas at Austin 46 1144 24.87 11
9 University of Michigan, Ann 44 488 11.09 11
Arbor, USA
10 Arizona State University, USA 43 239 5.56 9
11 Stanford University, USA 42 457 10.88 11
12 University of Florida, USA 42 412 9.81 9
13 University of Cambridge, U.K. 41 281 6.85 9
14 University of California, 39 518 13.28 9
Irvine, USA
15 National University of 38 74 1.95 4
Singapore
16 Georgia Institute of 38 160 4.21 6
Technology, USA
17 Indiana University, USA 38 170 4.47 8
18 Ohio State University, USA 36 425 11.80 10
19 Nanyang Technological 35 137 3.91 7
University, Singapore
20 University of Illinois at 34 201 5.91 9
Urbana-Champaign, USA
Total of 20 Organizations 914 11884 13.00 9.7
Total of the World 7916 44543 5.63
Share of Top 20 Organizations 11.55 26.68 2.31
in Global Output
S.No Name of the Organization ICP %ICP HCP %HCP
1 Michigan State University, 11 15.71 7 10
USA
2 Carnegie Mellon University, 11 15.94 2 2.90
USA
3 Cornell University, USA 9 16.67 0 0
4 Pennsylvania State University, 10 18.87 1 1.89
USA
5 Microsoft Research, USA 16 30.77 1 1.92
6 University of Maryland, USA 8 15.69 1 1.96
7 University of Wisconsin at 7 14.28 0 0
Madison, USA
8 University of Texas at Austin 5 10.87 4 8.69
9 University of Michigan, Ann 4 9.09 0 0
Arbor, USA
10 Arizona State University, USA 3 6.98 0 0
11 Stanford University, USA 9 21.43 1 2.38
12 University of Florida, USA 2 4.76 1 2.38
13 University of Cambridge, U.K. 22 53.66 0 0
14 University of California, 11 28.20 1 2.56
Irvine, USA
15 National University of 12 31.59 0 0
Singapore
16 Georgia Institute of 8 21.05 0 0
Technology, USA
17 Indiana University, USA 5 13.16 0 0
18 Ohio State University, USA 5 13.89 1 2.78
19 Nanyang Technological 12 34.28 0 0
University, Singapore
20 University of Illinois at 8 23.53s 0 0
Urbana-Champaign, USA
Total of 20 Organizations 178 19.47 20 2.19
Total of the World
Share of Top 20 Organizations
in Global Output
TP=Total Papers; TC=Total Citations; ACPP=Average Citations Per Paper;
HI=h-index; ICP=International Collaborative Papers; HCP=High Cited
Papers
Table 6. Scientometric profile of 15 Top Most Productive Authors on
Facebook, 2005-14
S.No Name of Affiliation of the TP TC ACPP
the Author Author
1 N.B. Ellison Michigan State 26 3037 116.8
University, USA
2 C. Lampe Michigan State 24 2998 124.9
University, USA
3 M.A. University of 22 233 10.59
Morena Wisconsin,
Madison, USA
4 M. Kosinski University of 18 163 9.056
Cambridge, U.K.
5 J. Vitak Michigan State 18 192 10.67
University, USA
6 S.D. Young University of 14 111 7.929
California, Ls
Angles, USA
7 H. Krasnova Humboldt 13 105 8.077
Universitat zu
Berlin, Germany
8 D. Stillwell University of 13 163 12.54
Cambridge, U.K.
9 J Han University of Illinois 12 99 8.25
at Urbana-
Champaign, USA
10 M. Shehab University of North 12 115 9.583
Carolina, USA
11 B.Y. Zhao University of 12 314 26.17
California, Santa
Barbara, USA
12 S. Lawson University of 12 60 5
Lincoln, U.K.
13 D.Y. Wohn Michigan State 11 142 12.91
University, USA
14 D. Boyd Harward University, 11 306 27.82
USA
15 R.Gray Michigan State 11 51 4.636
University, USA
Total of 15 Authors 229 8089 35.32
Total of the World 7916 44543
Share of Top 15 2.89 18.16
Authors in Global
Output
S.No Name of HI ICP %ICP HCP %HCP
the Author
1 N.B. Ellison 11 2 7.69 5 19.23
2 C. Lampe 10 2 8.33 5 20.83
3 M.A. 8 1 4.54 0 0
Morena
4 M. Kosinski 4 14 77.78 0 0
5 J. Vitak 6 1 5.55 0 0
6 S.D. Young 6 1 7.14 0 0
7 H. Krasnova 3 9 69.23 0 0
8 D. Stillwell 4 12 92.31 0 0
9 J Han 7 2 16.67 0 0
10 M. Shehab 4 0 0 0 0
11 B.Y. Zhao 6 4 33.33 1 8.33
12 S. Lawson 5 3 25 0 0
13 D.Y. Wohn 3 1 9.09 0 0
14 D. Boyd 4 0 0 2 18.18
15 R.Gray 5 0 0 0 0
5.73 52 22.71 13 5.68
TP=Total Papers; TC=Total Citations; ACPP=Average Citations Per Paper;
HI=h-index; ICP=International Collaborative Papers; HCP=High Cited
Papers
Table 7. Top 20 Journals Publishing on Facebook Research, 2005-14
S.No. Name of the Journal Number of Papers
2005- 2010- 2005-
09 14 14
1 Computers in Human Behavior 3 172 175
2 Cyberpsychology, Behavior & Social 0 80 80
Networking
3 First Monday 11 40 51
4 Journal of Medical Internet Research 1 48 49
5 New Media and Society 3 31 34
6 Public Relations Review 2 28 30
7 Information Communication & Society 1 29 30
8 PLOS One 0 26 26
9 Fortune 8 14 22
10 Journal of Computed Mediated 8 13 21
Communication
11 Business Horizons 1 19 20
12 Computers & Education 0 20 20
13 Social Science Computer Review 1 17 18
14 Australasian Journal of Educational 0 18 18
Technology
15 Mediterranean Journal of Social 0 17 17
Sciences
16 American Journal of Pharmacy 2 15 17
Education
17 Proceedings of the ASIST Annual 0 16 16
Meetings
18 International Journal of Web Based 0 16 16
Communities
19 IEEE Spectrum 2 13 15
20 Strategic Direction 1 13 14
Total of 20 journals 44 645 689
Total of the world 672 7244 7916
Share of 20 journals in world total 6.55 8.90 8.70
Table 8. List of Most Significant Keywords Appearing in Global
Literature on Facebook, 2005-14
S.No Keyword Frequency
1 Facebook 3540
2 Social Networks 3279
(Online)
3 Social Network or 2069
Networking
4 Social Media 1556
5 Internet 1025
6 Social Networking 794
Sites
7 Students 427
8 World Wide Web 365
9 Privacy 358
10 Twitter 341
11 Web 2.0 302
12 Information 280
Systems
13 Data Privacy 259
14 Online Systems 229
15 Behavior Research 222
16 Social Science 217
Computer
17 Data Mining 202
18 YouTube 194
19 Marketing 187
20 Information 180
Technology
15 Research 168
21 Teaching 160
22 Education 143
23 Social Support 135
24 Psychological 133
Aspects
25 Mobile Devices 132
26 E-Learning 129
27 Social Interactions 111
28 Social Network 101
Services
29 Human Relations 100
30 Interpersonal 98
Relations
31 Commerce 98
32 Industry 93
33 Social Behavior 92
34 Blogging 89
35 Virtual Reality 89
36 Social Network 86
Analysis
37 Electronic 85
Commerce
38 Social Relationship 74
39 Economic & Social 73
Effects
40 Engineering 72
Education
41 Higher Education 63
42 Advertising 60
43 Sales 60
44 Medical 57
Information
45 Curricula 55
46 Medical Education 50
47 Public Relations 49
48 College Students 47
49 University Studies 46
50 Health Services 46
51 Health Promotion 45
52 Universities 43
53 College 47
Students
54 Libraries 41
55 Sales 39
56 Computer 37
Aided
Instruction
S7 Learning 33
58 Collaborative 31
Learning
59 Tourism 30
60 Heath 29
Education
61 Undergraduat 28
e Studies
62 Academic 28
Libraries
63 Viral 25
Marketing
64 Marketing of 25
Health
Services
65 Social 25
Commerce
66 Competition 23
67 Consumer 22
Behavior
68 Economics 21
69 Financial 19
Management
70 Public 19
Relations
71 Marketing 18
Stategy
72 Social 18
Marketing
73 Human 17
Relations
74 Digital 16
Libraries
75 University 12
Libraries
76 Brand Image 9
Figure 2: Citation Profile of Facebook Research, 2005-14
Citations Percentage Percentage
Frequency Share of Share of
Range Papers Citations
0 61.41 0
01-10 28.89 18.12
11-20 4.46 11.47
21-30 1.81 7.97
31-40 0.77 4.61
41-50 0.48 4.03
51-100 1.26 15.48
>100 0.92 38.32
Note: Table made from bar graph.
Please Note: Illustration(s) are not available due to copyright
restrictions.
COPYRIGHT 2015 University of Idaho Library
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2015 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
