{ "id": "epp1za8fe0", "slug": "co-citation-analysis", "title": "Co-citation analysis", "updated": "2026-10-15", "topic_path": [ { "id": "physical", "label": "Physical world and mathematics", "api_url": "https://www.edgepedia.org/api/v1/topics/physical" }, { "id": "physical.science", "label": "General science and scientific practice", "api_url": "https://www.edgepedia.org/api/v1/topics/physical.science" }, { "id": "physical.science.research_methods_design", "label": "Research methods and experimental design", "api_url": "https://www.edgepedia.org/api/v1/topics/physical.science.research_methods_design" }, { "id": "physical.science.research_methods_design.bibliometrics-and-network-analysis", "label": "Bibliometrics and network analysis", "api_url": "https://www.edgepedia.org/api/v1/topics/physical.science.research_methods_design.bibliometrics-and-network-analysis" } ], "geo": [ { "id": "geo.nongeo.t1946.physical.science.research_methods_design", "label": "Non-geographic · 1946 to 2000: Research methods and experimental design", "api_url": "https://www.edgepedia.org/api/v1/geo/geo.nongeo.t1946.physical.science.research_methods_design", "path": [ { "id": "geo.nongeo", "label": "Non-geographic", "api_url": "https://www.edgepedia.org/api/v1/geo/geo.nongeo" }, { "id": "geo.nongeo.t1946", "label": "Non-geographic · 1946 to 2000", "api_url": "https://www.edgepedia.org/api/v1/geo/geo.nongeo.t1946" }, { "id": "geo.nongeo.t1946.physical", "label": "Physical world and mathematics", "api_url": "https://www.edgepedia.org/api/v1/geo/geo.nongeo.t1946.physical" }, { "id": "geo.nongeo.t1946.physical.science", "label": "General science and scientific practice", "api_url": "https://www.edgepedia.org/api/v1/geo/geo.nongeo.t1946.physical.science" }, { "id": "geo.nongeo.t1946.physical.science.research_methods_design", "label": "Research methods and experimental design", "api_url": "https://www.edgepedia.org/api/v1/geo/geo.nongeo.t1946.physical.science.research_methods_design" } ] } ], "excerpt": "Co-citation analysis is a bibliometric method counting how often pairs of documents are cited together by later papers, mapping the intellectual structure of research fields.", "snippet": "Co-citation analysis is a bibliometric method counting how often pairs of documents are cited together by later papers, mapping the intellectual structure of research fields.", "node": "physical.science.research_methods_design.bibliometrics-and-network-analysis", "markdown": "# Co-citation analysis\n\nCo-citation analysis is a bibliometric method that counts how often pairs of documents are cited together by later papers and uses those frequencies to map the intellectual structure of a research field. Two documents are co-cited when a third, later document cites both; the more often this happens, the stronger the link between them, even if the two documents never cite each other directly.[1](https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630240406) • [2](https://www.casrai.org/guides/citation-network-analysis) Clusters of frequently co-cited documents are read as specialties or schools of thought, which makes the method a standard tool of science mapping alongside bibliographic coupling.[3](https://www.isko.org/cyclo/citation_analysis)\n\n| Key fact | Detail |\n|---|---|\n| Definition | Frequency with which two documents are cited together by later documents[1](https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630240406) |\n| Introduced | Henry Small (1973) and, independently, I. Marshakova-Shaikevich (1973)[1](https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630240406) • [4](https://garfield.library.upenn.edu/marshakova/marshakovanauchtechn1973.pdf) |\n| Antecedent | Bibliographic coupling, M. M. Kessler (1963)[5](https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.5090140103) |\n| Author-level variant | Author co-citation analysis, White and Griffith (1981)[6](https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630320302) |\n| Common normalizations | Jaccard index, Pearson correlation, cosine, association strength[7](https://www.leydesdorff.net/aca/aca.pdf) • [8](https://usiena-air.unisi.it/retrieve/3df1e9a7-0c7a-476c-9ecf-cac4163edc63/Petrovich_Science%20maps_academia_version.pdf) |\n| Main software | VOSviewer and CiteSpace[9](https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3) • [10](https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20317) |\n| Best suited for | Clustering older, well-cited papers from a current perspective[3](https://www.isko.org/cyclo/citation_analysis) • [11](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11192-025-05324-z) |\n\n## How it works\n\nIf \\( A \\) is the set of papers citing document \\( a \\) and \\( B \\) the set citing document \\( b \\), then \\( A \\cap B \\) is the set citing both, and \\( n(A \\cap B) \\) is the co-citation frequency; Small proposed a relative co-citation frequency of \\( n(A \\cap B) \\div n(A \\cup B) \\).[1](https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630240406) A high co-citation frequency means the community of citing papers repeatedly treats the two documents as jointly relevant, which is interpreted as subject or intellectual similarity. In a co-citation network, the link weight (co-citation strength) is proportional to the number of common citations the two documents gather.[8](https://usiena-air.unisi.it/retrieve/3df1e9a7-0c7a-476c-9ecf-cac4163edc63/Petrovich_Science%20maps_academia_version.pdf)\n\nThe relation is prospective and dynamic: it is measured from the citing side, so it changes as citation patterns accumulate, and it tracks how a field's structure evolves over time.[2](https://www.casrai.org/guides/citation-network-analysis) • [12](https://research.gold.ac.uk/id/eprint/26859/1/Zupic%20Cater%202015%20-%20Bibliometric%20Methods%20in%20management%20and%20organization.pdf) This contrasts with bibliographic coupling, which counts shared items in two papers' own reference lists and is fixed at publication.[5](https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.5090140103) • [13](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157720301978) Small's particle-physics data showed the two measures give significantly different patterns: of 36 possible couplings among 9 papers, 5 pairs with high co-citation had no bibliographic coupling at all.[14](https://garfield.library.upenn.edu/essays/v2p028y1974-76.pdf)\n\n## How it is done\n\nThe classic Small-Griffith procedure runs as follows.[15](https://garfield.library.upenn.edu/ci/chapter8.pdf)\n\n1. Define scope and extract a highly cited subset of documents from a citation index, applying a citation-frequency threshold.\n2. Sort to a source-item index and extract all co-cited pairs, counting identical citing entries.\n3. Consolidate the pair list into a co-citation matrix whose cells hold the number of times each pair is co-cited.[7](https://www.leydesdorff.net/aca/aca.pdf)\n4. Normalize the raw counts with a similarity measure (Jaccard, cosine, association strength, or Pearson).\n5. Cluster: single-linkage clustering sequentially links pairs sharing a document, with resolution controlled by a co-citation threshold; multivariate alternatives include multidimensional scaling, factor analysis, and modularity clustering.[15](https://garfield.library.upenn.edu/ci/chapter8.pdf) • [7](https://www.leydesdorff.net/aca/aca.pdf) • [16](https://yingding.ischool.utexas.edu/Publication/ContentACA.pdf)\n6. Label and visualize clusters, for example by examining the titles of the most cited publications in each cluster and its most frequent terms.[11](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11192-025-05324-z)\n\nFor author co-citation analysis, the traditional six-step process is: select authors, retrieve co-citation frequencies, compile the raw citation matrix, convert it to a correlation matrix, apply multivariate analysis, and interpret and validate the results.[16](https://yingding.ischool.utexas.edu/Publication/ContentACA.pdf) Counting choices must also be fixed in advance: traditional first-author, pure first-author, or pure and/or general co-citations, with retrieval constrained by topic, journal coverage, time span, or citation window.[17](https://www.issi-society.org/proceedings/issi_2003/26_rousseau.pdf)\n\n## Origin\n\nCo-citation was introduced by Henry Small of the Institute for Scientific Information in \"Co-citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents\" (Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 1973), building on Kessler's 1963 bibliographic coupling as the antecedent coupling method.[1](https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630240406) • [5](https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.5090140103) The same relation was introduced independently in 1973 as \"prospective coupling,\" the logical opposite of Kessler's retrospective coupling.[4](https://garfield.library.upenn.edu/marshakova/marshakovanauchtechn1973.pdf) Science maps based on co-citation analysis were generated to study collagen research.[8](https://usiena-air.unisi.it/retrieve/3df1e9a7-0c7a-476c-9ecf-cac4163edc63/Petrovich_Science%20maps_academia_version.pdf) White and Griffith extended the method to authors in 1981, mapping information science from Social Sciences Citation Index data over 1972-1979 and showing identifiable author groups akin to \"schools.\"[6](https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630320302) Co-citation analysis was adopted as the de facto standard in the 1970s, though bibliographic coupling has since regained ground.[3](https://www.isko.org/cyclo/citation_analysis)\n\n## Variants\n\nThe unit of analysis can be a document, an author, or a journal. Author co-citation analysis (ACA) counts co-citations of cited authors rather than cited documents; a 2009 comparison found that including all cited authors, rather than first authors only, can provide a better fit.[18](https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v80y2009i1d10.1007_s11192-007-2019-y.html) Journal co-citation analysis applies the same logic to cited journals.[8](https://usiena-air.unisi.it/retrieve/3df1e9a7-0c7a-476c-9ecf-cac4163edc63/Petrovich_Science%20maps_academia_version.pdf) Content-based ACA is an extension that weights citations by the citing content instead of treating all citations equally.[16](https://yingding.ischool.utexas.edu/Publication/ContentACA.pdf)\n\nTwo main software packages are [VOSviewer](https://www.edgepedia.org/vosviewer) and [CiteSpace](https://www.edgepedia.org/citespace). VOSviewer, introduced by Nees Jan van Eck and Ludo Waltman of CWTS Leiden in 2009, builds co-citation networks of publications, journals, or researchers and offers fractional counting, in which each of the \\( m \\) citations made by a document is weighed \\( 1/m \\).[9](https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3) • [19](https://www.vosviewer.com/download/f-x2.pdf) CiteSpace, introduced by Chaomei Chen and freely available since 2004, applies time slicing with three threshold sets (\\( c \\), \\( cc \\), \\( ccv \\)) for citation counts, co-citation counts, and co-citation coefficients across earliest, middle, and last slices, and adds Kleinberg burst detection and Freeman [betweenness centrality](https://www.edgepedia.org/betweenness-centrality), with cluster and time-zone views.[10](https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20317) • [20](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1560567/)\n\n## Applications\n\nCo-citation analysis is used to map the intellectual structure of fields and identify schools of thought, to study the specialty structure of science, and to build indexing and selective-dissemination-of-information profiles.[1](https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630240406) • [3](https://www.isko.org/cyclo/citation_analysis) Small's guidance is that bibliographic coupling suits mapping current papers, while co-citation is the better choice for mapping older key papers from a current perspective.[3](https://www.isko.org/cyclo/citation_analysis) It also underpins science-mapping pipelines in which clustering of publications is based on co-citation or bibliographic coupling relations, sometimes combined.[21](https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0154404)\n\n## Limitations and alternatives\n\nA citation link is not an endorsement: papers are cited critically, in passing, or as background, and co-citation infers relatedness from citation patterns rather than sentiment or weight.[2](https://www.casrai.org/guides/citation-network-analysis) Traditional co-citation and ACA also weight all citations equally, ignoring variation in citing content.[16](https://yingding.ischool.utexas.edu/Publication/ContentACA.pdf) King's summarized objections include loss of relevant papers, inclusion of nonrelevant papers, overrepresentation of theoretical articles, a time lag before new specialties appear in maps, and subjectivity in threshold setting, which strongly affects cluster size and content; whether maps display cognitive or social structure has also been contested.[22](https://www.cwts.nl/tvr/documents/avr-cocit-word-i.pdf)\n\nThresholds matter because co-citation analysis filters cited publications to keep only those with enough citation data; setting the level is described as \"more art than science,\" and selecting cited publications too narrowly means some smaller subgroups will not be found.[12](https://research.gold.ac.uk/id/eprint/26859/1/Zupic%20Cater%202015%20-%20Bibliometric%20Methods%20in%20management%20and%20organization.pdf) A 2025 sensitivity analysis in VOSviewer found a minimum co-citation threshold of 5 gave a large, dense, hard-to-interpret network, 15 gave a sparse, fragmented one, and 10 the best balance.[23](https://cdn.amegroups.cn/static/public/TCR-2025-1303-Supplementary.pdf) Cluster size can also undergo sudden percolation-like expansion when the similarity threshold drops slightly, reflecting the emergence of a giant component; co-citation partitions can be statistically invalid at both high and low co-citation strengths, with a narrow region of validity between critical thresholds.[24](https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/infome/v3y2009i4p332-340.html) Database choice matters too: networks built from [Web of Science](https://www.edgepedia.org/web-of-science), Scopus, or OpenAlex are not identical because each indexes a different set of journals, conferences, and citation links, and protocols that rely exclusively on Web of Science may introduce bias toward that repository.[2](https://www.casrai.org/guides/citation-network-analysis) • [25](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xpro.2024.103269)\n\nAgainst alternatives, published comparisons are mixed. Small found bibliographic coupling a less reliable indicator of subject similarity than co-citation,[14](https://garfield.library.upenn.edu/essays/v2p028y1974-76.pdf) but Boyack and Klavans, comparing four approaches on 2,153,769 biomedical articles (2004-2008), found bibliographic coupling slightly outperforms co-citation on textual-coherence and grant-linkage measures, with direct citation least accurate; each approach clustered over 92% of the corpus.[26](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asi.21419) Klavans and Boyack later found direct citation better than both coupling measures when citing papers have many references.[11](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11192-025-05324-z) Because co-citation requires a third citing paper, it excludes recent papers that have not yet been cited and is most suitable for clustering older papers.[11](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11192-025-05324-z)\n\nSince 2023, science mapping has moved toward large open datasets and content-based methods: embedding-based document representations trained with citation importance have been applied to 33 million papers across all disciplines (2000-2022),[27](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0306457325004984) and OpenAlex has been used to build openly accessible global base maps of science.[28](https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0308041) A combined co-citation and word analysis, using words from citing publications to evaluate and improve co-citation maps, is an earlier precedent for such hybrid approaches.[22](https://www.cwts.nl/tvr/documents/avr-cocit-word-i.pdf)\n\n## References\n\n1. [Henry Small (1973). Co‐citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents. Journal of the American Society for Information Science.](https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630240406)\n2. [Citation Network Analysis: Co-Citation, Bibliographic Coupling, and Mapping Tools (CASRAI)](https://www.casrai.org/guides/citation-network-analysis)\n3. [Citation analysis (IEKO), International Society for Knowledge Organization](https://www.isko.org/cyclo/citation_analysis)\n4. [Marshakova-Shaikevich I. \"System of Document Connections Based on References\" Nauchn-Techn.Inform. Ser.2, 1973(6):3-8](https://garfield.library.upenn.edu/marshakova/marshakovanauchtechn1973.pdf)\n5. [M. M. Kessler (1963). Bibliographic coupling between scientific papers. American Documentation.](https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.5090140103)\n6. [Howard D. White, Belver C. Griffith (1981). Author cocitation: A literature measure of intellectual structure. Journal of the American Society for Information Science.](https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630320302)\n7. [Co-occurrence Matrices and their Applications in Information Science: Extending ACA to the Web Environment (Leydesdorff & co-author)](https://www.leydesdorff.net/aca/aca.pdf)\n8. [Science Mapping and Science Maps (Petrovich)](https://usiena-air.unisi.it/retrieve/3df1e9a7-0c7a-476c-9ecf-cac4163edc63/Petrovich_Science%20maps_academia_version.pdf)\n9. [Nees Jan van Eck, Ludo Waltman (2009). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics.](https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3)\n10. [Chaomei Chen (2005). CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology.](https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20317)\n11. [A comparison of citation-based clustering and topic modeling for science mapping (Scientometrics, 2025)](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11192-025-05324-z)\n12. [Bibliometric Methods in Management and Organization (Zupic & Cater, 2015)](https://research.gold.ac.uk/id/eprint/26859/1/Zupic%20Cater%202015%20-%20Bibliometric%20Methods%20in%20management%20and%20organization.pdf)\n13. [Return to basics: Clustering of scientific literature using structural information (Journal of Informetrics)](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157720301978)\n14. [Reprint of Small (1973) in Garfield's Essays of an Information Scientist, Vol. 2](https://garfield.library.upenn.edu/essays/v2p028y1974-76.pdf)\n15. [Chapter 8, Mapping the Structure of Science (Garfield, Citation Indexing)](https://garfield.library.upenn.edu/ci/chapter8.pdf)\n16. [Content-based Author Co-citation Analysis](https://yingding.ischool.utexas.edu/Publication/ContentACA.pdf)\n17. [A Classification of Author Co-citations (Rousseau, ISSI 2003)](https://www.issi-society.org/proceedings/issi_2003/26_rousseau.pdf)\n18. [A comparative study of first and all-author co-citation counting, and two different matrix generation approaches (Scientometrics, 2009)](https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v80y2009i1d10.1007_s11192-007-2019-y.html)\n19. [Visualizing bibliometric networks (van Eck & Waltman, VOSviewer)](https://www.vosviewer.com/download/f-x2.pdf)\n20. [CiteSpace II: Visualization and Knowledge Discovery in Bibliographic Databases (Chen)](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1560567/)\n21. [Clustering Scientific Publications Based on Citation Relations: A Systematic Comparison of Different Methods (PLOS One)](https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0154404)\n22. [Mapping of science by combined co-citation and word analysis. I. Structural aspects (van Raan/CWTS)](https://www.cwts.nl/tvr/documents/avr-cocit-word-i.pdf)\n23. [Sensitivity analysis of co-citation network structure across minimum co-citation thresholds (5, 10, and 15)](https://cdn.amegroups.cn/static/public/TCR-2025-1303-Supplementary.pdf)\n24. [Critical thresholds for co-citation clusters and emergence of the giant component (Journal of Informetrics, 2009)](https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/infome/v3y2009i4p332-340.html)\n25. [Protocol for conducting bibliometric analysis in biomedicine and related research using CiteSpace and VOSviewer software (STAR Protocols, 2024)](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xpro.2024.103269)\n26. [Co-citation analysis, bibliographic coupling, and direct citation: Which citation approach represents the research front most accurately? (Boyack & Klavans, JASIST)](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asi.21419)\n27. [Citation importance-aware document representation learning for large-scale science mapping (Information Processing & Management, 2025)](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0306457325004984)\n28. [The use of OpenAlex to produce meaningful bibliometric global overlay maps of science (PLOS One, 2024)](https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0308041)\n\n---\n*Topic: Encyclopedia › Physical world and mathematics › General science and scientific practice › Research methods and experimental design › Bibliometrics and network analysis*\n\n*Initially written Sep 29, 2026 · Edited: Oct 15, 2026*\n\n*Copyright 2026 EdgeChat AI, a subsidiary of Biostate AI.*\n\nLicense: Edgepedia Community License 1.0, https://www.edgepedia.org/edgepedia/license\n", "same_as": [], "url": "https://www.edgepedia.org/co-citation-analysis", "markdown_url": "https://www.edgepedia.org/co-citation-analysis.md", "license": { "name": "Edgepedia Community License 1.0", "url": "https://www.edgepedia.org/edgepedia/license", "summary": "Free with credit, commercial use included. AI training is open to everyone. For other uses, organizations over USD 100M in revenue or 100M monthly users license separately.", "spdx": "LicenseRef-Edgepedia-Community-1.0" }, "credit": "\"Co-citation analysis\", Edgepedia (EdgeChat), https://www.edgepedia.org/co-citation-analysis. Edgepedia Community License 1.0.", "credit_md": "\"[Co-citation analysis](https://www.edgepedia.org/co-citation-analysis)\", Edgepedia (EdgeChat), [https://www.edgepedia.org/co-citation-analysis](https://www.edgepedia.org/co-citation-analysis). [Edgepedia Community License 1.0](https://www.edgepedia.org/edgepedia/license).", "credit_html": "\"Co-citation analysis\", Edgepedia (EdgeChat), https://www.edgepedia.org/co-citation-analysis. Edgepedia Community License 1.0.", "speakable": "Co-citation analysis is a bibliometric method counting how often pairs of documents are cited together by later papers, mapping the intellectual structure of research fields." }