Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMohamed, Abdelbaseer A.
dc.date.accessioned2026-07-10T10:27:26Z
dc.date.available2026-07-10T10:27:26Z
dc.date.issued2026-04-30
dc.identifier.issn1231-1952
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11089/58868
dc.description.abstract Imagine a scientific world in which researchers everywhere have equal opportunities to publish and gain recognition. Far from being an exception, space syntax research is shaped by structural inequalities that privilege Northern institutions and epistemologies. While existing bibliometric reviews broadly map the field, they overlook how selective indexing structures global visibility. Drawing on 2,323 Web of Science–indexed space syntax articles, this review examines publication growth, citation impact, and journal landscapes across regions. The findings show that although research activity is expanding globally, particularly in Asia, citation impact remains concentrated in the United States and the United Kingdom. Elite Northern journals dominate the field, while Southern scholarship largely circulates in less visible venues, reinforcing enduring geographical imbalances in knowledge production.en
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherWydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiegopl
dc.relation.ispartofseriesEuropean Spatial Research and Policy;1en
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
dc.subjectspace syntaxen
dc.subjectbibliometricsen
dc.subjectgeographical inequalityen
dc.subjectcitation impacten
dc.subjectstructural invisibilityen
dc.titleMapping the geographical imbalance in space syntax researchen
dc.typeArticle
dc.page.number191-208
dc.contributor.authorAffiliationUniversity of Lodz, Faculty of Economics and Sociology, Social-Ecological Systems Analysis Laben
dc.identifier.eissn1896-1525
dc.referencesALBARRAN, P., CRESPO, J. A., ORTUÑO, I. and RUIZ-CASTILLO, J. (2011), ‘The skewness of science in 219 sub-fields and a number of aggregates’, Scientometrics, 88 (2), pp. 385–397. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0407-9en
dc.referencesARIA, M. and CUCCURULLO, C. (2017), ‘Bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis’, Journal of Informetrics, 11 (4), pp. 959–975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007en
dc.referencesBABBU, A. H. (2023), ‘Mapping space syntax as a computational tool: A bibliometric analysis’, Journal of Engineering Science and Technology Review, 16 (6), pp. 82–89. https://doi.org/10.25103/jestr.166.10en
dc.referencesBASSIOUNEY, R. (2024), ‘The politics of writing and reading: An Arabic sociolinguistics perspective [Journal of Arabic Sociolinguistics]’, International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 289–290, pp. 53–58. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl-2024-0131en
dc.referencesBASSIOUNEY, R. and MUEHLHAEUSLER, M. (2017), ‘Cairo: The linguistic dynamics of a multilingual city’, [in:] SMAKMAN, D. and HEINRICH, P. (eds), Urban sociolinguistics: The city as a linguistic process and experience, Routledge.en
dc.referencesBETTENCOURT, L. M. A., KAISER, D. I., KAUR, J., CASTILLO-CHAVEZ, C. and WOJICK, D. E. (2008), ‘Population modeling of the emergence and development of scientific fields’, Scientometrics, 75 (3), pp. 495–518. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1888-4en
dc.referencesBORNMANN, L. and MUTZ, R. (2015), ‘Growth rates of modern science: A bibliometric analysis based on the number of publications and cited references’, Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66 (11), pp. 2215–2222. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23329en
dc.referencesCHEN, C. and LEYDESDORFF, L. (2014), ‘Patterns of connections and movements in dual-map overlays: A new method of publication portfolio analysis’, Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65 (2), pp. 334–351. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22968en
dc.referencesDONTHU, N., KUMAR, S., MUKHERJEE, D., PANDEY, N. and LIM, W. M. (2021), ‘How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines’, Journal of Business Research, 133, pp. 285–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070en
dc.referencesGANDIA, R. M., ANTONIALLI, F., CAVAZZA, B. H., NETO, A. M., LIMA, D. A. DE, SUGANO, J. Y., NICOLAI, I. and ZAMBALDE, A. L. (2019), ‘Autonomous vehicles: Scientometric and bibliometric review’, Transport Reviews, 39 (1), pp. 9–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2018.1518937en
dc.referencesGONZALEZ-BRAMBILA, C. N., VELOSO, F. M. and KRACKHARDT, D. (2013), ‘The impact of network embeddedness on research output’, Research Policy, 42 (9), pp. 1555–1567. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.07.008en
dc.referencesHICKS, D., WOUTERS, P., WALTMAN, L., DE RIJCKE, S. and RAFOLS, I. (2015), ‘Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics’, Nature, 520 (7548), pp. 429–431. https://doi.org/10.1038/520429aen
dc.referencesHILLIER, B. (1996), Space is the machine: A configurational theory of architecture, Cambridge University Press.en
dc.referencesKING, D. A. (2004), ‘The scientific impact of nations’, Nature, 430 (6997), pp. 311–316. https://doi.org/10.1038/430311aen
dc.referencesKRENZ, K., PSARRA, S. and NETTO, V. M. (2023), ‘Mapping the conceptual system of an urban theory and its evolution: A text analysis of space syntax conference papers over 20 years’, Urban Morphology, 27 (2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.51347/UM27.0014en
dc.referencesLANGUM, V. and SULLIVAN, K. P. H. (2020), ‘Academic writing, scholarly identity, voice and the benefits and challenges of multilingualism: Reflections from Norwegian doctoral researchers in teacher education’, Linguistics and Education, 60, 100883. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2020.100883en
dc.referencesLEYDESDORFF, L. and WAGNER, C. (2009), ‘Is the United States losing ground in science? A global perspective on the world science system’, Scientometrics, 78 (1), pp. 23–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-008-1830-4en
dc.referencesMARTINS, A. (2020), ‘Reimagining equity: Redressing power imbalances between the global North and the global South’, Gender and Development, 28 (1), pp. 135–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/13552074.2020.1717172en
dc.referencesMENG, D. and ZHANG, J. (2025), ‘The evolution of space syntax over the past two decades: Evidence from China’, Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering, 24 (5), pp. 4606–4624. https://doi.org/10.1080/13467581.2024.2399739en
dc.referencesMERTON, R. K. (1968), ‘The Matthew Effect in Science: The reward and communication systems of science are considered’, Science, 159 (3810), pp. 56–63. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.159.3810.56en
dc.referencesMOHAMED, A. A. (2025), ‘Using BERTopic modelling to map the evolution of space syntax re-search’, Land Use Policy, 157, 107639. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2025.107639en
dc.referencesMOHAMED, A. A. and VAN DER LAAG YAMU, C. (2024), ‘Space Syntax has Come of Age: A Bibliometric Review from 1976 to 2023’, Journal of Planning Literature, 39 (2), pp. 203-217. https://doi.org/10.1177/08854122231208018en
dc.referencesMUR-DUEÑAS, P. (2019), ‘The experience of a NNES outer circle novice scholar in scholarly publication’, [in:] HABIBIE, P. and HYLAND, K. (eds), Novice Writers and Scholarly Publication: Authors, Mentors, Gatekeepers, pp. 97–115, Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95333-5_6en
dc.referencesOZTIG, L. I. (2024), ‘IR and the Global South: Revising Obstacles to a Global Discipline’, Global South Review, 5 (2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.22146/globalsouth.89891en
dc.referencesPARNELL, S. and ROBINSON, J. (2012), ‘(Re)theorizing Cities from the Global South: Looking Beyond Neoliberalism’, Urban Geography, 33 (4), pp. 593–617. https://doi.org/10.2747/0272-3638.33.4.593en
dc.referencesPETERS, D. P. and CECI, S. J. (1982), ‘Peer-review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted again’, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5 (2), pp. 187–195. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00011183en
dc.referencesSAREWITZ, D. and PIELKE, R. A. (2007), ‘The neglected heart of science policy: Reconciling supply of and demand for science’, Environmental Science and Policy, 10 (1), pp. 5–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2006.10.001en
dc.referencesSINGH, V. K., SINGH, P., KARMAKAR, M., LETA, J. and MAYR, P. (2021), ‘The journal coverage of Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions: A comparative analysis’, Scientometrics, 126 (6), pp. 5113–5142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03948-5en
dc.referencesSMITH, M. J., WEINBERGER, C., BRUNA, E. M. and ALLESINA, S. (2014), ‘The Scientific Impact of Nations: Journal Placement and Citation Performance’, PLOS ONE, 9 (10), e109195. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0109195en
dc.referencesTIKLY, L. (2024), Transforming knowledge and research for just and sustainable futures: Towards a new social imaginary for higher education (Nos. 33; ED-2024/WP-33/1; Education, Research and Foresight: Working Papers, p. 13), UNESCO, https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000390388 [accessed on 24.12.2025].en
dc.referencesVAN NES, A. and YAMU, C. (2021), Introduction to Space Syntax in Urban Studies, Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-59140-3en
dc.referencesVAUGHAN, L., PEPONIS, J. and DALTON, R. C. (eds) (2025), Space Syntax: Selected papers by Bill Hillier, UCL Press. https://doi.org/10.14324/111.9781800087712en
dc.referencesWAGNER, C. S., WHETSELL, T. A. and MUKHERJEE, S. (2019), ‘International research collaboration: Novelty, conventionality, and atypicality in knowledge recombination’, Research Policy, 48 (5), pp. 1260–1270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2019.01.002en
dc.referencesWATSON, V. (2014), ‘African urban fantasies: Dreams or nightmares?’, Environment and Urbanization, 26 (1), pp. 215–231. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956247813513705en
dc.referencesYAMU, C., VAN NES, A. and GARAU, C. (2021), ‘Bill Hillier’s legacy: Space syntax—A synopsis of basic concepts, measures, and empirical application’, Sustainability, 13 (6), 3394. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063394en
dc.referencesZHOU, P. and LEYDESDORFF, L. (2006), ‘The emergence of China as a leading nation in science’, Research Policy, 35(1), pp. 83–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.08.006en
dc.referencesZUPIC, I. and ČATER, T. (2015), ‘Bibliometric methods in management and organization’, Organizational Research Methods, 18 (3), pp. 429–472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629en
dc.contributor.authorEmailabdo121@windowslive.com
dc.identifier.doi10.18778/1231-1952.33.1.03
dc.relation.volume33


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0