PreprintCited by 133scientometrics and bibliometrics researchMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsWeb visibility and informetrics

Representative Literature Reviews Using Constrained Snowball Sampling and Citation Network Analysis

Open access
Lecy, Jesse D., Beatty, Kate E.·2012·SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract

We present here a new method for literature reviews that utilizes citation network analysis from academic databases. Special attention is paid to the construction of the citation network in order to ensure that the sample contains key publications in the field. Keyword searches in databases can be misleading because keywords are not used consistently across publications. Snowball sampling is onerous because the sample grows at an exponential rate. Constrained snowball sampling (limiting the percentage of articles collected at each level) is presented as a feasible and effective alternative that allows for robust citation analysis using a small fraction of the data. The methodology is outlined here. Free software for the R environment is also available.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2139/ssrn.1992601

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lecy, J. D., & Beatty, K. E.
Affiliations
  • Arizona State University (US)
  • Saint Louis University (US)
Corresponding author
Lecy, Jesse D.
Venue
SSRN Electronic Journal
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012
ISSN
1556-5068 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1499565482
Cited by
133
References
20
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
SSRN Electronic Journal (acceptedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Web visibility and informetrics
Keywords
citation network analysis, citation analysis, keyword search limitations, sample size reduction, R package

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review