A visual overview of key developments of international family business research in the past three decades
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The family business is an important form of economic organization. In 1988, the authoritative aca- \ndemic journal of the research field, the Family Business Review, marked the official formation of the family business research field. With the development of the research field, it is particularly important to systematically sort out the research status and development of the field and grasp the development trend of future research. We use the citation visualization software CiteSpace to conduct a bibliometric analysis of the 2054 family research literatures from SSCI sources from 1988 to 2017. \nThe study found that from the perspective of the law of scientific development, the research institute of the family business in 2000 was in the sporadic exploration period, which just started to attract the attention of the academic circles. From 2000 to 2006, the family business field began to learn from the mature theoretical analysis phenomenon of other disciplines in the social science field. The research literature has grown rapidly and entered the development period. After 2007, it entered the emergence period of the paradigm. The new leading research perspective showed the socioemotional wealth framework, and the research results began to show an exponential upward trend. From the research theme, entrepreneurship, succession, and corporate governance are the key areas for family business research. From the perspective of leading theory, the agency theory in the first two decades is the most important mainstream theory in family business research. In the past ten years, the framework of socioemotional wealth has sprung up, which has opened up a new direction for family business research. From the geographical distribution of research literature, the current focus of family business research is in North America represented by the United States and Canada and Western Europe represented by the United Kingdom, Spain, etc. Australia, China and other countries/regions are also widely distributed. Among them, scholars such as Chrisman, Chua and Miller are representative scholars in North America, and Gomez-Mejia and De Massis are representative scholars in Europe. \nThis paper has the following contributions: (1) In terms of methods, this paper uses CiteSpace, a citation visualization software, as a research tool to help readers understand the current situation and development trend of family business research intuitively, comprehensively and deeply. (2) In terms of sample source, the sample papers of this paper come from a wide range of sources, including 2054 articles from 1988 to 2017. (3) In terms of theoretical cognition, this paper identifies families with scientific law theory and four-stage model, and helps researchers to understand the current development stages and development requirements of family business research. This study provides a clear presentation of the results of the research through visualization techniques, providing a basis for family business researchers to quickly and intuitively understand the domain's profile and progress. \nRegardless of the theoretical aspect or the empirical method, there are still missing "puzzles" in the research field of family business. Therefore, the article provide four recommendations for future research directions. First, family business researchers need to focus on the accumulation of core knowledge. And future researchers can use meta-analysis and other methods to analyze, collate and summarize core knowledge on the basis of many documents that do not reach consensus conclusions, and promote further research. Second, the socioemotional wealth (SEW) of family businesses requires more direct measurement. Call on future researchers to use the grounded theo- ry and other methods to explore more direct SEW measurement methods, and also integrate into the Chinese con- text, further refine the SEW dimensions and explore its unique situation. Third, family business research can be more integrated into Chinese contextual factors. At present, the results of family business research are mainly based on Western research results, most of which are used in domestic research, ignoring some unique Chinese situational factors. Finally, new concepts in this field are difficult to guarantee external validity based on the lack of cross-country research. The future research can add more evidence of transnational research.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.029 | 0.050 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.005 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".