Journals / İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi / 2021 / Cilt: 13 - Sayı: 1

A Bibliometric Profile of the Tourism-Economics Sub-Field in Turkish Academic Community

Pages
790–812
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Findings - It is concluded that studies on the macroeconomic context are ahead of the microeconomic context, and that the role of tourism on economic growth is the mostly studied and cited subject.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Purpose - The aim of the study is to reveal the main characteristics of the domestic tourism-economics literature, as well as to compare the contributions made by the tourism, economics and administrative science (EAS) academia.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Design/methodology/approach - To fulfil this aim, 291 articles in peer-reviewed journals published between 2000 and 2019 were compiled, encoded, categorized and analysed based on semi-systematic literature review principles.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Findings - It is concluded that studies on the macroeconomic context are ahead of the microeconomic context, and that the role of tourism on economic growth is the mostly studied and cited subject.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:2000 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Purpose - The aim of the study is to reveal the main characteristics of the domestic tourism-economics literature, as well as to compare the contributions made by the tourism, economics and administrative science (EAS) academia. The purpose is to identify the most distinctive aspects, more specifically, subjects (subdivision of economics, main topics, subtopics), methods (study design and sub design) and citations within the literature. Design/methodology/approach - To fulfil this aim, 291 articles in peer-reviewed journals published between 2000 and 2019 were compiled, encoded, categorized and analysed based on semi-systematic literature review principles. Findings - It is concluded that studies on the macroeconomic context are ahead of the microeconomic context, and that the role of tourism on economic growth is the mostly studied and cited subject. Furthermore, these studies are dominantly carried out by authors from the department of EAS. Similarly, quantitatively designed studies have three times more representation than qualitatively and conceptually designed studies. Within that, causality analysis, panel data and multiple approaches are generally adopted for quantitative studies, while tables are chosen as the leading method within qualitative ones. Discussion – All these findings imply that studies macroeconomics, conceptually designed and carried out by authors from EAS are more likely to be cited.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÖZEKİCİ, Y. K. (2021). A Bibliometric Profile of the Tourism-Economics Sub-Field in Turkish Academic Community. İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi, Cilt: 13 - Sayı: 1, 790–812. https://ajindex.com/articles/217538

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Arıca, R. (2014). Seyahat işletmeciliği literatürünün gelişim süreci: Türkiye’de hazırlanan lisansüstü tez çalışmalarının bibliyometrik olarak incelenmesi. VII. Lisansüstü Turizm Öğrencileri Araştırma Kongresi. Kuşadası, Türkiye. Arıkan-Saltık, I. (2020). Turist rehberliği konulu ulusal lisansüstü tezlerin bibliyometrik profili (1989-2018). Çankırı Karatekin Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 11(1), 45–69.
  2. Arslan, E. (2020). Yeni Tokat havalimanı'nın bölgesel turizm hareketlerindeki rolü: Memleket ziyaretleri kapsamında bir araştırma. Tourism and Recreation, 2(2), 97-105.
  3. Aydın, B. (2017). Yükseköğretim kurulu tez merkezinde (yöktez) yiyecek içecek işletmeciliği alanında kayıtlı bulunan tezlerin bibliyometrik analizi. Disiplinlerarası Akademik Turizm Dergisi, 2(1), 23–38.
  4. Bahar, O., & Kozak, M. (2012). Turizm Ekonomisi (4. Baskı). Detay Yayıncılık. Bayın, G. (2015). Türkiye’de Sağlık Turizmi Alanında Yapılan Lisansüstü Tezlerin İçerik Değerlendirmesi. Karamanoğlu Mehmetbey Üniversitesi Sosyal Ve Ekonomik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 2015(1), 55. Baytok, A., Boyraz, M., Çetin, A., Mutlu, H., & Katırcıoğlu, E. (2019). Etik ve sosyal sorumluluk konulu bildirilerin bibliyometrisi: Ulusal Turizm Kongreleri örneği (2009-2017). Güncel Turizm Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3(1), 65–81.
  5. Boğan, E., Çalışkan, C., & Dedeoğlu, B. (2018). Turizm Yazınında Kurumsal Sosyal Sorumluluk: Türkiye’de Yapılan Çalışmaların Bibliyometrik Analizi. Turizm Akademik Dergisi, 5(2), 47–62.
  6. Botterill, D., Haven, C., & Gale, T. (2002). A survey of doctoral theses accepted by universities in the UK and Ireland for studies related to tourism, 1990-1999. Tourist Studies, 2(3), 283–311.
  7. Bozgeyik, Y., & Kutlu, A. (2019). Türkiye’de Cari Açığın Belirleyicileri: 1992-2017 Dönemi İçin Ampirik Çalışma. Maliye Dergisi, 176, 1–26.
  8. Bozgeyik, Yusuf, & Yoloğlu, Y. (2015). Türkiye’de Turizm Gelirleri İle Gsyh Arasindaki İlişki: 2002-2014 Dönemi. Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 8(40), 627–640.
  9. Bozok, D., Kılıç, S. N., & Özdemir, S. S. (2017). Bibliometric analysis of rural tourism on tourism literature Turizm literatüründe kırsal turizmin bibliyometrik analizi. Journal of Human Sciences, 14(1), 187–202.
  10. Bruner, E. M. (2010). Science and Humanism in Tourism Studies. In Annals of Tourism Research, 37(3), 861-865.
  11. Butler, R. (2015). The evolution of tourism and tourism research. Tourism Recreation Research, 40(1), 16–27.
  12. Canosa, A., Moyle, B. D., Moyle, C., & Weiler, B. (2018). Anthropology and soc