2024/2, стр. 157 - 176

A BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS OF HISTORY RESEARCHES ON TURKEY 1975 – 2023

Резюме:

Ключови думи:

1. Introduction

Anatolia, where Turkey was founded, has been home to many civilizations in history and has been the battleground of countless states. Located between the Black Sea, the Aegean, and the Mediterranean Sea in the triangle of Asia, Europe, and the Middle East, this geography has been the center of the Seljuk Empire, the Ottoman Empire, and finally the Republic of Turkey in recent centuries.

The Ottoman Empire, which experienced its most glorious years during its classical period, established sovereignty over a wide geography covering Africa, Europe, and parts of Asia in a short period. However, it stagnated in the 16th century and started to lose territory rapidly in the 17th century (Unat 2022, p. 15).

While progress was made in Western civilization through several changes and transformations such as Reform, Renaissance, and Industrial Revolution over the centuries, the Ottoman Empire could not follow these developments (Mardin 1991, р. 12). On the other hand, the Ottoman Empire, which could not correct the deteriorating economic, military, and administrative order with the reform movements it realized, entered the War of Tripoli (1911), Balkan Wars (1912 – 1913), and World War I (1914 – 1918) one after the other. At the end of World War I, the Ottoman Empire withdrew from the war with the Armistice of Mondros. In response to this decision of the Ottoman Empire, the communities in the Anatolian geography, under the leadership of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, carried out the liberation struggle against the occupations between 1919 and 1922, and at the end of this struggle, a new state was established in Anatolian lands. Thus, under the leadership of Atatürk, “the greatest nation-builder of modern times” as Andrew Mango put it, Turkey took its place in history (Mango 2004, p. xi). On October 29 of 1923, the republican regime was established in Turkey, and the country gained its current structure as a result of revolutions and modernization processes in the political, legal, and cultural spheres. Founded in Anatolia with Ankara as its capital, Turkey continued to host the cultural and social heritage of the Ottoman Empire. In other words, “in the phases of critical continuities and discontinuities, the Ottoman borders contracted over time and the communities living within the borders of the empire changed” (Findley 2016, p. 4). Turkey, which has maintained a certain degree of continuity in terms of cultural and social codes from the Ottoman Empire, has adopted a secular and modern construction process as a basic principle in political terms. This historical, institutional, and geographical outlook of Turkey has become the main source of scholarly studies in the social sciences. Turkey has become an important country for history researches in terms of its founding stage, the modernization process it experienced, and its geopolitical location.

This study provides a bibliometric analysis of history researches on Turkey. The boundaries of the study consisted of the studies in the Web of Science database (WoS) between 1975 and 2023. As a result of research on the internet, some bibliometric studies in history research, in general, have been reached. Within the framework of these studies, bibliometric studies in the history of education (Roda-Segarra et al. 2023), economics (Claveau and Gingras 2016), science (Sensales et al. 2011), philosophy (Bevernage et al. 2019), agriculture (Moraes 2020) history education (Bozdoğan and Sönmez 2023) (GomezCarrasco et al. 2022) were reached. However, there is a lack of bibliometric analysis in history researches on individual countries. Also, it has been observed that there is a lack of bibliometric analysis of history researches on Turkey. This study aims to conduct a bibliometric analysis of history researches on Turkey. The main purpose of this study is to analyze the studies on the recent history of Turkey. For this reason, the scope of the study was defined as Turkey’s founding period, its aftermath, and the period up to the present day, and accordingly, the keywords ‘Turkey’, ‘Turkish Republic’, and ‘Republic of Turkey’ were searched in the WoS database.

This study identifies the country-specific dynamics of studies in the field of history and provides researchers with a broad in-depth knowledge of the periodic process, current status, and future directions. To achieve these aims, the study tries to find answers to the following research questions:

– What are the influential aspects of history researches on Turkey in the field of history science?

– What are the academic trends of journals and authors on Turkey in history researches, given the main themes and networks?

– What broad conclusions can be drawn from the existing literature for future research?

2. Method

The bibliometric analysis is used mainly to collect and analyze information on patterns of knowledge accumulation, the most prominent authors and journals in a research field, the words most frequently used in the articles, etc. (Pinto 2019; Župic and Čater 2015). It is also a popular analysis method to see trending topics in a research field and to predict future research directions. In this study, the bibliometric analysis method is preferred to show the systematic evaluation of history researches on Turkey.

The search database for performing the bibliometric analysis was Web of Science of Clarivate Analytics. In the topic field of the search query, the terms “Turkey”, “Turkish Republic” and “Republic of Turkey” were typed with an OR operator in between (i.e. TS=(Turkey or “Turkish Republic” or “Republic of Turkey”) with the refinement criteria of Document type=Article and Web of Science Categories=History. An online search was performed in May 2023, which returned 1288 articles. The analysis tools for the bibliometric analysis are the RStudio, the Biblioshiny web app (version 4.1.2), and the VOSviewer software (version 1.6.19).

In the study, performance analysis and science mapping techniques were used for the bibliometric analysis. The performance analysis examines the contributions of research products to a particular field (Donthu et. al. 2021). The science mapping analysis focuses on the relationships between research items (Naveen et al. 2021). In Figure 1 both the techniques used and the software tools used for the analysis are illustrated.

3. Findings and Discussion

3.1. Descriptive Characteristics of the Literature

Table 1. Descriptive characteristics of the literature on history researches on Turkey

MAIN INFORMATION ABOUT DATA
Timespan 1975:2023
Sources (Journals) 230

Documents 1288 Annual Growth Rate % 5.12

Document Average Age 8.55

Average citations per doc 2.481

References 52127

DOCUMENT TYPES

Article 1288

DOCUMENT CONTENTS

Keywords Plus (ID) 517

Author‘s Keywords (DE) 3526 AUTHORS Authors 1449 Authors of single-authored docs 934 AUTHORS COLLABORATION Single-authored docs 1048 Co-Authors per Doc 1.29

Table 1 displays the main information about the research in the field of history which is related to Turkey in the WoS database. The oldest article in the database dates back to 1975. A total of 230 journals indexed in the WoS database include 1,288 articles. The annual growth rate of the publications is %5.12 which indicates that there is a slight increase in the studies related to the history of Turkey. The average number of citations per document is 2.481 which is quite low. The average age of the documents is 8.55 which states that the studies in history about Turkey are quite recent.

The scientific production of history researches on Turkey has increased almost continuously form the year of 2003. This is mainly due to the increase in the number of indexed journals which are related to the history of Turkey in the WoS database. The decrease in publications of the year 2023 is because a database search was performed in the middle of the year 2023. In the year 2021, the highest number of publications in the field was observed.

3.3. Trend Topics

In this study, 3,526 authors’ keywords were collected from 1,288 articles in WoS covering the topics of “Turkey”, “Republic of Turkey”, and “Turkish Republic” from 1975 to 2023. Figure 3 shows the historical evolution of the most used keywords by authors. The horizontal lines in the graph represent the peak periods of the mentioned topics, while the blue dots represent the average duration of the articles published with the corresponding keyword during the year. The size of the dots in the graph represents the density of the corresponding keywords in the articles.

It is seen that the concept of ‘Turkey’ is widely used as a keyword in history researches between 2015 – 2021. ‘Atatürk’, ‘Kemalism’, and ‘Ottoman Empire’ are the main topics of study in the field, with the horizontal lines indicating the intensity of the topics indicated and spread over time. After 2013, studies on ‘Europe’, ‘culture’, ‘modernity’, ‘minorities’, and ‘England’ were concentrated, while in 2015 ‘democratization’, ‘Turkish nationalism’, and ‘Italy’ came to the fore. Recently, ‘USSR’, ‘China’, ‘refugees’, and ‘Black Sea’ have been trend topics in the research field. The most intense year for these topics was 2021. According to the density of the points in the indicator in the graph, that is, the density of the relevant keywords in the articles, it is seen that the most prevalent keywords from 1975 to 2023 are ‘Europe’, ‘Nationalism’, ‘Ottoman Empire’, ‘Atatürk’, ‘Kemalism’, ‘Turkey’, and ‘Russia’.

It can be said that the change in trend topics in recent years is due to the developments in social, political, and inter-state relations. For instance, the USSR, China, and the Black Sea are among the trend topics in Turkey’s relations with other countries or in terms of diplomacy and economic relations between these countries from a historical perspective. It is possible to causally interpret the topic of ‘refugees’, which was among the trend topics after 2017, in a slightly broader framework. On the other hand, political and social events in various parts of the world and the resulting demographic changes and migrations have led to a differentiation in the focus of social sciences. In 2011, the so-called ‘Arab Spring’, which emerged in Arab countries in the Middle East such as Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and Syria with demands for political freedom, witnessed several developments that led to internal conflicts and the subsequent change of governments. Syria after 2011 with the central government and various social groups has led to the arrival of over three million three hundred thousand asylum seekers (under temporary protection status) in Turkey within the framework of regular migration according to official statements (RTMI-PMM1).2 Irregular migration to Turkey from Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and other countries continued to increase especially in 2017 and beyond.3 It is seen that the issue of migration and asylum-seekers, which occupies the society in Turkey, is also reflected in scientific studies. In the trend topics, it is seen that the topic of ’refugees’ has become a topic that has escalated in the studies in 2017, intensified in 2021, and continued afterward among the studies in the field of history about Turkey. This situation also implies that the authors are writing articles on the topics/issues addressed in the studies in the field of history before too much time has passed.

3.4. Influential Aspects of History Researches on Turkey

3.4.1. Core Journals

The core journals that mainly publish history researches on Turkey were analyzed by the source impact and Bradford’s Law analyses in R-Studio©. Table 2 displays the top ten journals based on the h-index of the related articles published in those journals. Besides the h-index, for each journal, m-index, g-index, total citation counts (TC), number of publications (NP), and publication starting year (PY-start) are also displayed in the table. The h-index is chosen as the cursor for ordering the list since it is emphasized as the best indicator for displaying and predicting the future success of the sources (Hirsch 2007, pp. 19193 – 19198).

Table 2. Top ten journals according to source impact

Anatolian Studies 10 13 0.625 237 34 2008

British Journal of Middle 10 17 0.625 445 64 2008

Eastern Studies

Comparative Studies in Society 9 13 0.250 254 13 1988

And History

Nations And Nationalism 9 13 0.692 188 26 2011

Nationalities Papers-The

Journal of Nationalism and 8 12 0.444 214 40 2006

Ethnicity

Politics Religion \& Ideology 6 11 0.333 125 17 2006

International Journal of The 5 8 0.417 66 14 2012

5 9 0.119 93 13 1982

4 6 0.182 47 9 2002 4 5 0.222 39 12 2006

Bradford’s Law analysis also brings forth core journals concerning the publication frequency of the relevant articles in the research field (Garfield 1980). In the analysis, three zones were identified from the highest to the lowest frequencies. In the highest Zone 1 there are a total of ten journals which are listed in Table 3. CTAD or the Cumhuriyet Tarihi Araştırmaları Dergisi is the journal that published more frequent articles concerning history researches on Turkey. However, according to the source impact analysis which was discussed in the former table, CTAD does not appear, since the articles in WoS do not cite the articles published in this source widely. British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies which had a high h-index in the impact analysis above also ranks second in Table 3. Other prominent journals following these sources are Voprosy Istorii which is centered in Russia, Tarih İncelemeleri Dergisi, Belleten, The Journal of Nationalism and Ethnicity, Anatolian Studies, and so forth.

3.4.2. Core Authors

The most influential authors in history researches on Turkey, whose articles are indexed in the WoS database are listed in Table 4 concerning their h-index values. In each row of the table, the g-index, m-index, total citation numbers received by the authors (TC), number of publications (NP), and the start year of the publications are given. In general, authors published in the relevant research field have very close and low h-indices. Kabadayı, Poblome, Sarıgil, …ngöre, and Waelkens share the same h-index value of three. Also, Aytürk, Basa, Bayar, Ben Aharon, and Bobrov share the same h-index value of two. The most cited author in the list is Sarıgil with 74 citations that were received for his three articles in the research field.

3.4.3. Most Frequent Words

Frequently used words in history researches on Turkey are shown in Table 5. The table consists of four sections: Keywords Plus, Author’s Keywords, Title, and Abstract. The most frequently used word in Keywords Plus and Author’s Keywords is ‘Turkey’. Among the most frequently used words, ‘Turkish Republic’ ranked fourth in the Title section and fifth in the Abstract. While the first three frequently used words in the Title section are ‘World War’, ‘Ottoman Empire’, and ‘Foreign Policy’, the first four frequently used words in the Abstract are listed as ‘Ottoman Empire’, ‘World War’, ‘Foreign Policy’, and ‘Middle East’. The word ‘Ottoman Empire’ is among the most frequently used words in all four sections, along with ‘Turkey’ and ‘Republic of Turkey’. This reflects the fact that the word ‘Ottoman Empire’ is also used in history studies related to ‘Turkey’ and ‘Republic of Turkey’ in general in all sections. When the Keywords, Titles, and Abstracts in history researches on Turkey are analyzed, it is seen that the ‘Ottoman Empire’ and ‘World War’ are favored the most by the authors. When evaluated based on the words used by the authors, the use of country names such as ‘Russia’, ‘Greece’, ‘Iran’, and the use of ‘Middle East’ in the regional sense, it is noteworthy that the history researches on Turkey is concentrated on Turkey’s neighbors and the geography with which Turkey is most geopolitically related. Considering the affinity of the field of history with the subject of foreign policy, it can be said that the studies conducted are also considered concerning this subject.

World War 37 Ottoman Empire 197 Ottoman Empire 27 World War 160 Foreign Policy 21 Foreign Policy 126 Turkish Republic 20 Middle East 98 Middle East 19 Turkish Republic 72 Cold War 16 Soviet Union 59 Turkish Foreign 10 Cold War 52 Modern Turkey 9 Russian Empire 42

National Identity 9 Foreign A󰀨airs 41

3.4.4. Most Relevant Affiliations

Table 6 shows the distribution of history researches on Turkey by universities around the world. Considering the number of publications based on universities, it is seen that Hacettepe University has the highest number of publications with 60 articles. Following Hacettepe University, Bilkent University ranked second with 50 articles and Ankara University ranked third with 45 articles. It is noteworthy that there is only one university outside the borders of Turkey among the top ten universities that are engaged in history researches on Turkey. Volgograd State University ranked fifth among the top ten universities with 35 articles. Among the top ten universities, the university with the least number of studies in Turkey is Middle East Technical University with 20 articles. In addition, Table 7 shows the article production by country. The highest number of articles in the research field was produced in Turkey, followed by Russia, the United States of America, the United Kingdom, and Germany respectively.

Table 7. Article production by country in history researches on Turkey

Turkey 1,053 Russia 391 United States of America 310

United Kingdom 170 Germany 89 France 56 Ukraine 48 Bulgaria 40 Italy 38

3.5. Conceptual Framework

3.5.1. Co-occurrence Network

In the study, the most used keywords among 1,88 articles were analyzed using VOSviewer. After setting the frequency of occurrence of the keyword to 5,104 of the 3,526 keywords used were displayed in the network within 621 relational links in Figure 4.

Table 8 presents the frequency of occurrence of the most common keywords in the articles, the number of links with other words, and the strength of these links. In this analysis, the most prominent keywords are ‘Turkey’, ‘Ottoman Empire’, ‘Russia’, ‘Nationalism’, ‘Islam’, ‘Greece’, ‘Iran’, ‘Middle East’, ‘Istanbul’ and ‘diplomacy’, in order of keyword occurrences.

As shown in Figure 4, the keyword ‘Ottoman Empire’ ranks second in terms of density and relationality and forms a cluster with concepts such as ‘Russian Empire’, ‘Caucasus’, ‘First World War’, ‘Galliopi’, ‘Pan-Turkism’, and ‘League of Nations’. The cluster formed by these keywords also shows harmony in terms of historical periodization and cause-effect and relationality. Keywords such as ‘First World War’, ‘Pan-Turkism’, ‘Gallipoli’, ‘League of Nations’, and ‘Caucasus’ are the phenomena that directly and indirectly formed the common points of the Ottoman Empire and Russian Empire, which took part in the First World War in terms of event patterns and causality.

‘Russia’ is another prominent keyword in the network. The words associated with the keyword ‘Russia’ form a cluster of keywords such as ‘Turkey’, followed by ‘Ottoman Empire’, ‘Armenia’, ‘Azerbaijan’, ‘Islam’, ‘South Caucasus’, ‘Cossacks’, ‘Iran’, ‘Georgia’, ‘geopolitics’, and ‘international relations’. In this cluster of keywords, it is seen that there are keywords that constitute the intersection points of the historical relationality of Russia and Turkey. It is observed that geopolitical and geostrategic reasons, which are the basis of Turkey’s bilateral relations with Russia in the historical process starting from the Ottoman Empire, form the basis of the other keywords in the cluster.

The keyword ‘Middle East’ forms a cluster with words such as ‘Afghanistan’, ‘China’, ‘Great Britain’, ‘USA’, ‘USSR’, ‘Japan’. It is seen that the cluster formed by other keywords related to the keyword ‘Middle East’ includes the names of countries located in the Middle East region or having geostrategic and geopolitical relations with this region.

The keyword ‘nationalism’forms another cluster with ‘nation-state’, ‘national identity’, ‘migration’, ‘refugees’, ‘World War I’, ‘Justice and Development Party’, and ‘Romania’. The relationality of ‘nation-state’ and ‘national identity’ within the cluster formed by the keyword ‘nationalism’ shows the intensity of studies on these issues about Turkey. Again, considering that nationalism is a subject that develops based on ideological debates, it is seen that the keywords ‘migration and ‘refugees’ are also related to the articles written. Among ‘nationalism’ and other keywords in the cluster, Justice and Development Party is seen as a political party in the recent period. This shows that the studies on Turkey in the field of history, in which the keywords in the cluster formed around the keyword ‘nationalism’ are used, extend to the recent period and address more current issues.

The keyword ‘diplomacy’ forms another cluster with several concepts around it. These concepts are ‘France’, ‘England’, ‘Greece’, ‘Italy’, ‘Spain’, ‘Europe’, ‘European Union’, ‘Cyprus’, ‘archives’, ‘war’ and ‘archaeology’. In this cluster of keywords, it is observed that there are countries that form the basis of diplomacy and the European Union, which is an economic and political organization of which some of these countries are also a part.

Along with the keyword ‘Balkan’, words such as ‘Serbia’, ‘Bulgaria’, ‘Crimea’, ‘North Caucasus’, ‘sovereignty’, ‘Circassians’, ‘foreign policy’, ‘historiography’, and ‘cold war’ form another cluster. This cluster shows that not only the countries defined as Balkan geography but also different keywords related to the Caucasus region and Circassians are among the studies.

In our analysis, the cluster that appears denser than the other clusters in terms of the number of concepts and relationality includes the political and social concepts clustered around the keyword ‘Republic of Turkey’ and the political and social keywords experienced during the establishment of the Republic. Words such as ‘Kemalism’, ‘Modernization’, ‘Republican People Party’, ‘Turkish Nationalism’, ‘Atatürk’, ‘Westernization’, ‘Democracy’, ‘Press’, ‘Propaganda’, ‘Democrat Party’, ‘Ankara’, and ‘Istanbul’ stand out in this cluster. These keywords clustered around the keyword and subject of Turkey are more intense in the early republican period starting from the Ottoman Empire period and reflect the most socio-political issues today. This data shows that the history researches on Turkey, which constitutes the main source of this study, is concentrated on Turkey’s domestic political and social issues.

Finally, another cluster related to the keyword “Turkey”, which includes ethnic groups in Turkey is observed in the network. The prominent keywords in this cluster are ‘Armenians’, ‘Kurds’, ‘minorities’, ‘Muslism’, ‘Turks’, and ‘Syria’. However, the concept of ‘collective memory’, which is only associated with the keyword ‘Turkey’, does not appear to be related to other clusters. This situation also shows that studies on ‘collective memory’ are sparse.

The recent studies on Turkey in the field of history after the year 2019 are shown as yellow nodes in Figure 5. Among these nodes, it is observed that ‘Russia’, ‘Russian Empire’, ‘USSR’, ‘Islam’, ‘Japan’, ‘China’, ‘Cyprus’, ‘war’, ‘Russian-Turkish relations’, ‘Russian-Soviet relations’, ‘USA’, ‘Bulgaria’, ‘Afghanistan’, ‘National Identity’, ‘Pan-Turkism’, ‘Cossacks’, and ‘Crimean Khanate’, according to the density.

3.5.2. Co-Authorship Analysis

Scientific collaboration among researchers is an important metric to understand the complexity and the scope of the research field. As the specialization of the research fields become broader and deeper as time passes, the importance to bring together different skills and knowledge together makes scientific collaboration from every perspective becomes a necessity (Sylvan and Martin 1997; Sonnenwald 2007). When researchers share common meanings and fulfillment of tasks to accomplish shared goals, scientific collaboration occurs (Sonnenwald 2007). Scientific collaboration promotes research in unpredicted directions by boarding the scope of the research that the researchers can conduct (Beaver 2001).

In order to understand the complexity and scope of a research field, it is important to understand the extent to which researchers in the field collaborate. Over time, specialization in a research field broadens and deepens. The collaboration of researchers with different skills and knowledge in a well-established field leads to the study of new and interesting topics. This is a phenomenon that necessitates scientific collaboration (Sylvan and Martin 1997; Sonnenwald 2007) Researchers who collaborate to achieve common goals engage in scientific collaboration when they have a common meaning (Sonnenwald 2007). Through scientific collaboration, the scope and direction of research develop in unprecedented ways (Beaver 2001).

The scientific collaboration analysis of history researches on Turkey was conducted with the co-authorship analysis in the VOSviewer program. Figure 6 shows the collaboration network resulting from this analysis. In the collaborative network, it can be seen that researchers mostly work independently and are not generally related either individually or as a group. This also means that no prominent group or individual is leading the research field.

3.5.3. Most Referenced Authors

Figure 7 illustrates the authors of the sources referenced in history researches on Turkey. After setting the minimum number of citations of an author to 20 in the co-citation analysis if authors performed in VOSviewer, the network of 85 out of 37077 authors is shown in Figure 7. In this network, there are many prominent names in the field of social sciences and history who have been the source of history researches on Turkey. These include Turkish authors such as Halil İnalcık, Şerif Mardin, Niyazi Berkes, Mete TunŒay, Metin Toker, Kemal Karpat, Şevket Pamuk, ağlar Keyder, Nilüfer Göle, Metin Heper, as well as international authors such as Bernard Lewis, Piere Bourdieu, Benedict Anderson, Ahmad Feroz, Michel Foucault, Erik Jan Zurcher.

4. Conclusion

In this study, the history researches in WoS that contain the words ‘Turkey’, ‘Turkish Republic’, and ‘Republic of Turkey’ were examined and bibliometrically analyzed. One of the first issues that draw attention on the data obtained is that the word ‘Turkey’ is used more than ‘Turkish Republic’ and ‘Republic of Turkey’. Most of the studies on Turkey were conducted in Turkey by Turkish authors. Specialization, language, sense of belonging, and command of scholarly fields can be said to be among the factors that explain this situation. Authors working in institutions in countries other than Turkey also have history researches on Turkey.

In the history researches on Turkey, it is seen that the political, social, and foreign policy changes in Turkey from the Ottoman Empire to the present day are reflected in the articles. While the topic of Pan-Turkism was studied during the Ottoman Empire period, it was observed that the topics such as nationalism, nationbuilding, Kemalism, etc. in the early republican period of Turkey were studied more intensively. In addition to this, the relations created by Turkey’s geopolitical and geostrategic position have also become the subject of studies and have formed the Foreign Policy and Diplomacy clusters.

The annual article growth rate of 5.12% can be considered quite high. The average publication age of 8.55 indicates that the publications are quite recent. The main reason for this situation can be interpreted as the increase in the number of journals indexed in WoS in the 2000s. Starting from the Republican period in Turkey, it is seen that ideologically based issues discussed in daily politics and public opinion, as well as social issues, have been studied by authors over the years. However, in recent years, it has been observed that the preferred topics and the subjects of articles have differentiated. While issues related to asylum seekers/ migrants started to be studied after 2017, a similar intensity of study was observed in China and Black Sea issues. This situation shows that the subject of history researches on Turkey is differentiated not only according to internal developments in Turkey but also according to the effects of external factors.

It has been observed that many international journals are effective in history researches on Turkey. In terms of the number of publications, it is seen that journals originating from Turkey come to the forefront. However, in terms of impact assessment, these journals have less impact than journals published in other countries. The main reason for this situation is that the publications in Turkish journals are mostly written in the Turkish language.

When the impact assessment of the researchers working in the field is made, it is noticeable that there is no prominent author, the number of publications of the authors is low and the number of citations of these publications is close to each other. It has been observed that the authors continue their studies by using and referring to the main sources instead of citing each other more. Another issue identified through the data obtained is that the articles are generally single-authored. Authors preferred to work individually instead of producing studies with multiple authors. It has been determined that those who wrote articles with more than one author were mostly non-Turkish authors. In their history researches on Turkey, the authors frequently made use of the works of prominent figures in the analysis of the issues starting from the Ottoman Empire to today’s Turkey.

NOTES

1. Republic of Turkey Ministry of Interior-The Presidency of Migration Management (RTMI-PMM).

2. RTMI-PMM, “Temporary Protection”, https://en.goc.gov.tr/temporary-protection27, (accessed June 6, 2023).

3. RTMI-PMM, “Irregular Migration”, https://en.goc.gov.tr/irregular-migration, (accessed June 6, 2023).

REFERENCES

Abbreviations

CTAD: Cumhuriyet Tarihi Araştırmaları Dergisi

RTMI-PMM: Republic of Turkey Ministry of Interior-The Presidency of Migration Management

WoS: Web of Science

Articles and Books

BEAVER D. D., 2001. Reflections on scientific collaboration (and its study): Past, present, and future. Scientometrics, vol. 52, no. 3, pp. 365 – 377. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014254214337

BEVERNAGE, B.; IECKER de ALMEİDA, G.; DELANOTE, B.; FROEYMAN, A.; HUIJBERS, P., & Van DE MİEROOP, K., 2019. Philosophy of history after 1945 : a bibliometric study. History and Theory, vol. 58, no. 3, pp. 406 – 436. https://doi.org/10.1111/hith.12124

BOZDOGAN K. & S„NMEZ „. F., 2023. Tarih eğitimi üzerine yapılan eğitim araştırmaları makalelerinin bibliyometrik analizi. Cumhuriyet Uluslararası Eğitim Dergisi, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 16 – 28. Available from: https://doi.org/10.30703/ cije.1104813.

CLAVEAU F. & GINGRAS Y., 2016. Macrodynamics of economics: a bibliometric history. History of Political Economy, vol. 48, no. 4, pp. 551 – 592. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1215/00182702-3687259.

DONTHU, N.; KUMAR, S.; MUKHERJEE D.; PANDEYN. & LIM W. M., 2021. How to Conduct a Bibliometric Analysis: An Overview and Guidelines, Journal of Business Research, vol. 133 (September), pp. 285 – 296. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070.

EGGHE, L., 2006. Theory and practise of the g-index. Scientometrics, vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 131 – 152. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-0060144-7

FINDLEY, C. V., 2016. Modern Türkiye tarihi- islam, milliyetŒilik ve modernlik. 1789 – 2007, 5th ed, İstanbul: Timaş Yayınları, ISBN: 978-605-114693-5.

GARFIELD, E. G., 1980. Bradford’s law and related statistical patterns. Essays of an Information Scientist, vol. 4, no. 19, pp. 476 – 483. Available from: http://www.garfield.library.upenn.edu/essays/v4p476y1979-80.pdf

GOMEZ-CARRASCO, C. J.; RODRIGUEZ MEDINA, J.; LOPEZ FACAL R. & MONTEAGUDO-FERNANDEZ J., 2022. A review of literature on history education: an analysis of the conceptual, intellectual and social structure of a knowledge domain (2000–2019). European Journal of Education, vol. 57, no. 3, pp. 497 – 511. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12508.

HIRSCH J. E., 2007. Does the H index have predictive power?. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 104, no. 49, pp. 19193 – 19198. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1073/ pnas.0707962104.

SYLVAN, K. J. & MARTIN, B. R., 1997. What is Research collaboration?. Research Policy, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 1 – 18. Available from: https://doi. org/10.1016/S0048-7333(96)00917-1.

MANGO, A., 2004. Atatürk. London: John Murray. ISBN: O-7195-6592-8 MARDIN, Ş., 1991. Türk modernleşmesi. İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları. ISBN: 975-470-057-5.

MORAES M. I., 2020. Agrarian history in Uruguay: from the “agrarian question” to the present. Historia Agraria, vol. 81, year: XX, pp. 1 – 30. Available from: https://doi.org/10.26882/histagrar.081e03m.

PINTO, M.; FERNANDEZ-PASCUAL, R.; CABALLERO-MARISCAL, D.; SALES, D.; GUERRERO, D. & URIBE A., 2019. Scientific production on mobile information literacy in higher education: A bibliometric Analysis (2006 – 2017). Scientometrics, vol. 120, no. 1, pp. 57 – 85. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11192-019-03115-x.

RODA-SEGARRA J.; PAYA RICO A. & HERNANDEZ HUERTA J. L. 2023. La historia de la educaci–n a travs de las revistas especializadas: Tem†ticas, producci–n cient‘fica y bibliometr‘a (1961 – 2022). Social and Education History, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 85 – 117. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-01903115-x.

SENSALES, G.; ARENİ, A. & DAL SECCO, A. 2011. Building the boundaries of a science: First representations of Italian social psychology between 1875 and 1954. History of Psychology, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 383 – 404. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023893.

SONNENWALD, D. H., 2007. Scientific collaboration. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 643 – 681. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/aris.2007.1440410121.

UNAT, K., 2022. Ondokuzuncu yüzyıl Osmanlı modernleşmesi. In: T. F. Ertan (Ed.). Başlangıcından Günümüze Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Tarihi, 9th ed., Ankara: Siyasal Kitabevi, pp. 13 – 31. ISBN: 978-605-5782-56-6.

ŽUPIC, I., & ČATER, T. 2015. Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 429 – 472. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629.