A Scientometric Review of Alexithymia: Mapping Thematic and Disciplinary Shifts in Half a Century of Research

Abstract

The term “alexithymia” was introduced in the lexicon of psychiatry in the early ‘70s by Sifneos to outline the difficulties manifested by some patients in identifying and describing their own emotions. Since then, the construct has been broadened and partially modified. Today this describes a condition characterized by an altered emotional awareness which leads to difficulties in recognizing your own and others' emotions. In half a century, the volume of scientific products focusing on alexithymia has exceeded 5,000. Such an expansive knowledge domain poses a difficulty for those willing to understand how alexithymia research has developed. Scientometrics embodies a solution to this issue, employing computational, and visual analytic methods to uncover meaningful patterns within large bibliographical corpora. In this study, we used the CiteSpace software to examine a corpus of 4,930 publications on alexithymia ranging from 1980 to 2020 and their 100,251 references included in Web of Science. Document co-citation analysis was performed to highlight pivotal publications and major research areas on alexithymia, whereas journal co-citation analysis was conducted to find the related editorial venues and disciplinary communities. The analyses suggest that the construct of alexithymia experienced a gradual thematic and disciplinary shift. Although the first conceptualization of alexithymia came from psychoanalysis and psychosomatics, empirical research was pushed by the operationalization of the construct formulated at the end of the ‘80s. Specifically, the development of the Toronto Alexithymia Scale, currently the most used self-report instrument, seems to have encouraged both the entrance of new disciplines in the study of alexithymia (i.e., cognitive science and neuroscience) and an implicit redefinition of its conceptual nucleus. Overall, we discuss opportunities and limitations in the application of this bottom-up approach, which highlights trends in alexithymia research that were previously identified only through a qualitative, theory-driven approach.

Surveying 80 Years of Psychodrama Research: A Scientometric Review

“…Scientometry has surfaced as a quantitative methodology to evaluate scientific production in a specific field of study (32), and has been used in the scientific community to examine research trends from the evolution of psychological constructs [e.g., (33)], advances in research methods and techniques [e.g., (34)], as well as content advancement in biology, medicine, physics and many more [e.g., (34)(35)(36)]. By using quantitative data such as citation metrics, scientometry offers an objective view of widely used citation pathways within specific domains of study, therefore informing the development of research and research impact of the literature (37).…”

Interpersonal Synchrony in the Context of Caregiver-Child Interactions: A Document Co-citation Analysis

“…Successful conversion when importing data on CiteSpace has a possible data loss of ~1.0–5.0%, which typically depends on data irregularity. Thus, the small percentage of data loss that occurred in the study (0.27%) can be considered as negligible (see Figure 1 ) (Gaggero et al, 2020 ).…”

A Scientometric Approach to Review the Role of the Medial Preoptic Area (MPOA) in Parental Behavior

“…To examine the connections between scientific works investigating the relationship between medial preoptic area and parenting, a DCA was first conducted. DCA is a type of analysis based on the frequency in which two documents have been co-cited (cited together) by subsequent works [26]. On CiteSpace, this type of analysis is conducted not only by considering the documents that are downloaded from scientific databases, but also by analyzing the references that they have cited in their text.…”