Department of Biological Sciences, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH 45221, USA.
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2022 Feb 28;377(1845):20200433. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2020.0433. Epub 2022 Jan 10.
Dominance hierarchies have been studied for almost 100 years. The science of science approach used here provides high-level insight into how the dynamics of dominance hierarchy research have shifted over this long timescale. To summarize these patterns, I extracted publication metadata using a Google Scholar search for the phrase 'dominance hierarchy', resulting in over 26 000 publications. I used text mining approaches to assess patterns in three areas: (1) general patterns in publication frequency and rate, (2) dynamics of term usage and (3) term co-occurrence in publications across the history of the field. While the overall number of publications per decade continues to rise, the percent growth rate has fallen in recent years, demonstrating that although there is sustained interest in dominance hierarchies, the field is no longer experiencing the explosive growth it showed in earlier decades. Results from title term co-occurrence networks and community structure show that the different subfields of dominance hierarchy research were most strongly separated early in the field's history while modern research shows more evidence for cohesion and a lack of distinct term community boundaries. These methods provide a general view of the history of research on dominance hierarchies and can be applied to other fields or search terms to gain broad synthetic insight into patterns of interest, especially in fields with large bodies of literature. This article is part of the theme issue 'The centennial of the pecking order: current state and future prospects for the study of dominance hierarchies'.
支配等级制度已经被研究了近 100 年。本文采用的科学研究方法提供了高水平的见解,了解支配等级研究的动态在这么长的时间尺度上是如何变化的。为了总结这些模式,我使用谷歌学术搜索提取了与“支配等级”相关的出版物元数据,共得到超过 26000 篇出版物。我使用文本挖掘方法评估了三个方面的模式:(1)出版频率和增长率的一般模式,(2)术语使用的动态,(3)该领域历史上出版物中的术语共现。虽然每十年的出版物总数仍在继续增加,但近年来增长率有所下降,这表明尽管人们对支配等级制度仍保持持续的兴趣,但该领域不再经历前几十年那样的爆炸式增长。从标题术语共现网络和社区结构的结果来看,支配等级研究的不同子领域在该领域的早期历史上分离得最为明显,而现代研究则更多地显示出凝聚力的证据,缺乏明显的术语社区边界。这些方法提供了对支配等级研究历史的总体看法,并可应用于其他领域或搜索词,以获得对感兴趣模式的广泛综合见解,尤其是在具有大量文献的领域。本文是主题为“啄序百年:支配等级研究的现状和未来前景”的一部分。