3.8 Article

THE SITUATION IN ACROBATIC GYMNASTICS: A BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS

期刊

SCIENCE OF GYMNASTICS JOURNAL
卷 15, 期 1, 页码 47-64

出版社

UNIV LJUBLJANA

关键词

acrobatic gymnastics; bibliometric analysis; scientific production

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aims to provide a static picture of the scientific research development in acrobatic gymnastics by collecting information about the main contributors, investigation topics, publication dynamics, and cooperative networks. The results suggest a lack of interest in the investigation of balance and pyramid balance, which are major features of acrobatic gymnastics.
Since acrobatic gymnastics is a recent, only a few decades old gymnastics discipline, it is not yet much explored as a scientific research field. Despite its increasing popularity, and while science mapping has become an essential activity for all scientific disciplines, no bibliometric analysis on this topic was available. Therefore, this study aims to provide a static picture of the scientific research development in acrobatic gymnastics by collecting information about the main contributors as well as the main investigation topics, the publication dynamics and cooperative networks. A search conducted in the Web of Science and Scopus databases retrieved 37 journal articles between 2001-2021. Results suggest that the year of 2015 was a milestone for scientific research in acrobatic gymnastics since it marked the beginning of the dominance of authors from Spain, followed by Poland and Portugal. Countries are generally focused on their own territory and there is a limited scientific collaboration between different nations. The Spanish and the Polish research institutions are leading publishing in this sport. As a reference for future studies, our results suggest that although balance was identified as the niche investigation topic, there has been a lack of interest for the pyramids balance, which is a major feature of acrobatic gymnastics.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据