Seeing the Forest for the Trees: A Bibliometric Analysis of Environmental and Resource Sociology

Qin, Hua; Prasetyo, Yanu Endar; Bass, Martha; Sanders, Christine; Prentice, Elizabeth; Nguyen, Quyen T.K.

doi:10.1080/08941920.2019.1620900

Cited by 18 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This study provides, to our knowledge, the first systematic map of peer reviewed social psychological literature published in leading multidisciplinary conservation journals. It follows a tradition of structured and systematic exercises to assess bodies of research literature in both conservation and psychology (e.g., Grichting 1989;Qin et al 2019). The resultant database constitutes a resource that can be used to critically assess the state of the field and serves as the basis for various other inquiries.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic map of conservation psychology

Wallen¹,

Landon²

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conservation science and practice commonly draw on the theories and methods of social psychology to explain human cognitions, emotions, and behaviors germane to biodiversity conservation. Here, we present a systematic map of the cross-disciplinary conservation science literature that draws on social psychology concepts and methods in their application broadly described as conservation psychology. Established protocols were used to systematically collect and collate peer-reviewed research published in an explicit selection of journals. Our purpose was to catalog the extant literature, elucidate trends and gaps, and critically reflect on the state of the field and its research practices aiming to influence conservation outcomes. Results show an upward trend in the number of publications per year and per decade between 1974-2016. A diversity of theoretical and methodological approaches was revealed. However, findings also revealed that the extant literature disproportionately focuses on specific concepts (attitudes and beliefs) and locations (North America and Europe), and contexts (terrestrial, rural). Data indicated that studies also tend to be descriptive, quantitative, and atheoretical in nature. From these results, we offer a critical assessment of the literature and provide recommendations for future applied conservation psychology research intended to inform science, practice, and policy.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic map of conservation psychology

Wallen¹,

Landon²

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our systematic map provides, to our knowledge, the first of the peer-reviewed social psychological literature published in leading multidisciplinary conservation journals. It follows a tradition of structured and systematic exercises to assess bodies of research literature in both conservation and psychology (e.g., Grichting 1989;Qin et al 2019). The resultant database constitutes a resource that can be used to critically assess the state of the field and serves as the basis for various other inquiries.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It follows a tradition of structured and systematic exercises to assess bodies of research literature in both conservation and psychology (e.g., Grichting 1989; Qin et al. 2019). The resultant database constitutes a resource that can be used to critically assess the state of the field and serves as the basis for various other inquiries.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic map of conservation psychology

Wallen

Landon

2020

Conservation Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conservation science and practice commonly draw on the theories and methods of social psychology to explain human cognition, emotion, and behavior germane to biodiversity conservation. We created a systematic map of the cross-disciplinary conservation science literature, which draws on social psychology concepts and methods in their application broadly described as conservation psychology. Established protocols were used to systematically collect and collate peer-reviewed research published in an explicit selection of multidisciplinary conservation journals. We sought to catalog the literature, elucidate trends and gaps, and critically reflect on the state of conservation psychology and its research practices that aim to influence conservation outcomes. The volume of publications per year and per decade increased from 1974 to 2016. Although a diversity of research designs and methods was applied, studies disproportionately focused on specific concepts (attitudes and beliefs), locations (North America and Europe), and contexts (terrestrial, rural). Studies also tended to be descriptive, quantitative, and atheoretical in nature. Our findings demonstrate that although conservation psychology has generally become more visible and prominent, it has done so within a limited space and suggest that disciplinary research principles and reporting standards must be more universally adopted by traditional and multidisciplinary conservation journals to raise the floor of empirical research.

show abstract

“…Or that we are again the journal of choice for a renewed dialogue about the differences between these two disciplines. This featured collection begins with Dr. Hua Qin and colleagues presenting the results from a bibliometric analysis of environmental and resource sociology articles focused on the U.S. and published from 1985-2017 (Qin et al 2019). In Table 3 of their article, they list authors who have 10 or more articles in their full database.…”

Section: Overview Of Featured Collection On a Bibliometric Analysis Omentioning

confidence: 99%