DOI: https://doi.org/10.14710/jis.25.1.2026.92-109

Mapping inclusive democracy through communication research: Bibliometric perspectives in Indonesia

*Assyari Abdullah orcid scopus  -  Universitas Islam Negeri Sultan Syarif Kasim, Indonesia
Sumaiyah Sumaiyah  -  Universitas Muhammadiyah Riau, Indonesia
Akmal Khairi  -  Sekolah Tinggi Agama Islam Imam Asy Syafii, Indonesia
Yasril Yazid  -  Universitas Islam Negeri Sultan Syarif Kasim, Indonesia
Mustafa Mustafa  -  Universitas Islam Negeri Sultan Syarif Kasim Riau, Indonesia
Jayus Jayus  -  Universitas Muhammadiyah Riau, Indonesia
Muhammad Soim  -  Universitas Islam Negeri Sultan Syarif Kasim, Indonesia
Dwi Sutri Astuti  -  Universitas Islam Negeri Sultan Syarif Kasim, Indonesia
Edison Edison  -  Universitas Islam Negeri Sultan Syarif Kasim, Indonesia
Open Access Copyright (c) 2026 Assyari Abdullah, Sumaiyah Sumaiyah, Akmal Khairi, Yasril Yazid, Mustafa Mustafa, Jayus Jayus, Muhammad Soim, Dwi Sutri Astuti, Edison Edison under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0.

Citation Format:
Abstract

This study aims to map the development of research on 'inclusive democracy' and 'communication' in Indonesia through a bibliometric approach using data from Dimensions AI. By analyzing 495 publications (402 articles and 93 proceedings) published during the period 2016-2025, this study identifies trends, network collaborations, and thematic clusters that shape the knowledge landscape of inclusive democracy in Indonesia. The analysis was conducted using VOSviewer software to generate network visualizations based on co-authorship, citation, and co-occurrence. The results show that inclusive democracy has experienced significant growth since 2021, especially after the COVID-19 pandemic, which has spurred increased studies on digital participation, transparent governance, and the courage of the public sphere. The main research clusters cover three domains: digital governance, communicative participation, and policy inclusion, confirming the close relationship between communication, technology, and participatory governance. The density of keywords such as democracy, transparency, technology, and community demonstrates that the focus of current research is shifting toward a more inclusive digital democracy based on participatory communication. Thus, this study not only provides an empirical overview of the literature on inclusive democracy in Indonesia but also emphasizes the importance of communication as a key instrument in strengthening democratic legitimacy and representation in the digital era.

Fulltext View|Download Email colleagues
Keywords: Inclusive democracy; communication; bibliometric; dimensions; artificial intelligence

Article Metrics:

Article Info
Section: Articles
Language : EN
Most cited articles
ECONOMIC RESILIENCE PADA INDUSTRI KREATIF GUNAMENGHADAPI GLOBALISASI DALAM RANGKA KETAHANAN NASIONAL Peran Indonesia Dalam Memerangi Terorisme More cited articles
  1. Abdullah, A. (2018). Membaca komunikasi politik gerakan aksi bela islam 212: antara politik identitas dan ijtihad politik alternatif. ANIDA’, 41(2), 202–212. http://ejournal.uin-suska.ac.id/index.php/Anida/article/view/4654
  2. Abdullah, A. (2020). Public Relations in The Era of Artificial Intelligence: Peluang atau Ancaman? Jurnal Aristo (Social, Politic, Humaniora), 8(2), 406–417
  3. Abdullah, A., Jayus, J., Rozita, R., & Sumaiyah, S. (2025). Pemanfaatan Artificial Intelligence dalam Aktivitas Public Relations: Humas Masa Depan dan Masa Depan Humas. In D. Kartikawangi & E. Setyaningtyas (Eds.), Perspektif Kecerdasan Artificial dalam Kehumasan. LSPR Publishing. https://omp.lspr.edu/index.php/omp/catalog/book/43
  4. Abdullah, A., Jayus, J., Yazid, Y., Sumaiyah, Sumaiyah, Khairi, A., Edison, E., Astuti, D. S., & Mutasir, M. (2024). Navigating Society 5.0: Unraveling the Dynamics of a People-Centric Super-Smart Society. ARISTO, 12(2), 642–659. https://doi.org/10.24269/ars.v12i2.9038
  5. Abdullah, A., Yazid, Y., Astuti, D. S., Soim, M., & Khairi, A. (2025). From Query to Communication: A Data-Driven Study of Indonesians Google Search Behavior. 2(1). https://journal.uir.ac.id/index.php/icommedig/article/view/26241/9233
  6. Abdullah, A., Yazid, Y., Jayus, J., Sumaiyah, S., Khairi, A., Edison, E., & Astuti, D. S. (2024). Google Trends and Indonesia Presidential Elections 2024: Predictor of Popularity Candidate in Digital Age. POLITICON: Jurnal Ilmu Politik, 6(2), 273–300. https://doi.org/10.15575/politicon.v6i2.34636
  7. ABS. (2020, June 30). Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification (ANZSRC), 2020 | Australian Bureau of Statistics. https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/classifications/australian-and-new-zealand-standard-research-classification-anzsrc/latest-release
  8. Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959–975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007
  9. Arter, D. (2006). From ‘spectator democracy’ to ‘inclusive democracy’? The peripatetic Scottish committees as linkage. Regional & Federal Studies, 16(3), 239–262. https://doi.org/10.1080/13597560600852300
  10. Belabas, W. (2023). Moving toward more inclusive government: Democratic and bureaucratic values in administrative structures. The American Review of Public Administration. https://doi.org/10.1177/00953997231190570
  11. Berto, J. (2019). Social Media, Open Platforms, and Democracy: Transparency Enabler, Slayer of Democracy, Both? Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2019.942
  12. Bogati, S., Firawati, T., Pinckney, J., & Thurber, C. (2025). How Civil Resistance Improves Inclusive Democracy. Perspectives on Politics, 23(2), 552–569. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592724000999
  13. Bukar, U. A., Sayeed, M. S., Razak, S. F. A., Yogarayan, S., Amodu, O. A., & Mahmood, R. A. R. (2023). A method for analyzing text using VOSviewer. MethodsX, 11, 102339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2023.102339
  14. Bünte, M., & Weiss, M. L. (2023). Civil Society and Democratic Decline in Southeast Asia. Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 42(3), 297–307. https://doi.org/10.1177/18681034231212488
  15. Camil, J. (2003). Inclusive Democracy. Democracy & Nature, 9(3), 427–428. https://doi.org/10.1080/1085566032000160061
  16. Catherine Williams. (2018). Dimensions from Digital Science. https://insights.uksg.org/articles/420/files/submission/proof/420-1-4083-1-10-20180906.pdf
  17. Cobo, M. J., López-Herrera, A. G., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2011). Science mapping software tools: Review, analysis, and cooperative study among tools. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(7), 1382–1402. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21525
  18. Congge, U., Guillamón, M.-D., Nurmandi, A., Salahudin, & Sihidi, I. T. (2023). Digital democracy: A systematic literature review. Frontiers in Political Science, 5, 972802. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2023.972802
  19. Della Porta, D., Donker, T. H., Hall, B., Poljarevic, E., & Ritter, D. P. (2018). Social movements and civil war: When protests for democratization fail (First published). Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315403106
  20. Dewi, K. H. (Ed.). (2022). Gender and Politics in Post-Reformasi Indonesia: Women Leaders within Local Oligarchy Networks. Springer Nature Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-1734-9
  21. Dimensions.AI. (2025). Why did we build Dimensions | Dimensions. https://www.dimensions.ai/why-dimensions/
  22. Ding, Y. (2011). Scientific collaboration and endorsement: Network analysis of coauthorship and citation networks. Journal of Informetrics, 5(1), 187–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.10.008
  23. Donthu, N., & Gustafsson, A. (2020). Effects of COVID-19 on business and research. Journal of Business Research, 117, 284–289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.06.008
  24. Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070
  25. Eck, N. J. V., & Waltman, L. (2009). How to normalize cooccurrence data? An analysis of some well‐known similarity measures. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(8), 1635–1651. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21075
  26. Eck, N. J. van, & Waltman, L. (2011). Text mining and visualization using VOSviewer (arXiv:1109.2058). arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1109.2058
  27. Erla Sharfina Permata Noor, Ahmadi Hasan, & Masyithah Umar. (2023). Demokrasi di Indonesia Mewujudkan Kedaulatan Rakyat. Indonesian Journal of Islamic Jurisprudence, Economic and Legal Theory, 1(4), 679–693. https://doi.org/10.62976/ijijel.v1i4.196
  28. Fatimah, S. (2023). Demokrasi Digital dan Welfar Estate Indonesia. Konferensi Nasional Asosiasi Pengajar Hukum Tata Negara Dan Hukum Administrasi Negara, 1(1), 855–886. https://doi.org/10.55292/ffhntw92
  29. Fraser, N. (2007). Special Section: Transnational Public Sphere: Transnationalizing the Public Sphere: On the Legitimacy and Efficacy of Public Opinion in a Post-Westphalian World. Theory, Culture & Society, 24(4), 7–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276407080090
  30. Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2005). Analysing Scientific Networks Through Co-Authorship. In H. F. Moed, W. Glänzel, & U. Schmoch (Eds.), Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research (pp. 257–276). Kluwer Academic Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-2755-9_12
  31. Grzywacz, A. (2020). Democracy in Indonesian Strategic Narratives. A New Framework of Coherence Analysis. Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 39(2), 250–269. https://doi.org/10.1177/1868103420903594
  32. Habermas, J. (1971). Knowledge and human interests (J. J. Shapiro, Trans.). Beacon Press
  33. Habermas, J. (1996). Between facts and norms: Contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. MIT Press
  34. Hansson, E., & Weiss, M. L. (2024). The Contested Domain of Political Space in Southeast Asia. In G. Facal, E. Lafaye De Micheaux, & A. Norén-Nilsson (Eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Political Norms in Southeast Asia (pp. 467–486). Springer Nature Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-9655-1_27
  35. Herzog, C., Hook, D., & Konkiel, S. (2020). Dimensions: Bringing down barriers between scientometricians and data. Quantitative Science Studies, 1(1), 387–395. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00020
  36. Herzog, C., & Lunn, B. K. (2018). Response to the letter “Field classification of publications in Dimensions: A first case study testing its reliability and validity.” Scientometrics, 117(1), 641–645. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2854-z
  37. Hook, D. W., Porter, S. J., Draux, H., & Herzog, C. T. (2021). Real-Time Bibliometrics: Dimensions as a Resource for Analyzing Aspects of COVID-19. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics, 5, 595299. https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2020.595299
  38. Hook, D. W., Porter, S. J., & Herzog, C. (2018). Dimensions: Building Context for Search and Evaluation. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics, 3, 23. https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2018.00023
  39. Hoon, C.-Y. (2017). Putting Religion into Multiculturalism: Conceptualising Religious Multiculturalism in Indonesia. Asian Studies Review, 41(3), 476–493. https://doi.org/10.1080/10357823.2017.1334761
  40. ICNC. (2022). Do Civil Resistance Movements Advance Democratization? International Center on Nonviolent Conflict. https://www.nonviolent-conflict.org/blog_post/civil-resistance-movements-advance-democratization/
  41. Indianto S., D., Nurasih, W., & Witro, D. (2021). Demokrasi Hibrid: Pemikiran Yasraf Amir Piliang tentang Demokrasi Indonesia di Era Digital. JISPO Jurnal Ilmu Sosial Dan Ilmu Politik, 11(1), 175–194. https://doi.org/10.15575/jispo.v11i1.12253
  42. Jakubowski, J., & Pająk-Patkowska, B. (2022). ‘More Social’ Means ‘More Flawed’: How New Media is Contributing to the Breakdown of Polish Democracy. Przegląd Politologiczny, (3), 47–56. https://doi.org/10.14746/pp.2022.27.3.4
  43. Jayus, J., Abdullah, A., Mustafa, M., & Sumaiyah, S. (2025). YouTube, Public Discourse, and the ‘Makan Siang Gratis’ Program: An Analysis of Toxicity Comments on the Liputan6 Channel. Proceeding Jogjakarta Communication Conference, 3(1). https://jcc-indonesia.id/proceeding/index.php/jcc/article/view/383
  44. Jayus, J., Abdullah, A., Sumaiyah, S., Wilindaya, I., & Mustafa, M. (2026). Publisher Rights for Quality Journalism: Opportunities and Challenges in Indonesia. Komunikator, 18(1), 84–101. https://doi.org/10.18196/jkm.v18i1.28841
  45. Jayus, J., Sumaiyah, S., Mairita, D., & Abdullah, A. (2024). Media Sosial sebagai Media Kampanye Politik Menjelang Pemilu 2024. JURNAL SIMBOLIKA Research and Learning in Communication Study, 10(1), 72–81. https://doi.org/10.31289/simbolika.v10i1.11468
  46. Kirby, A. (2023). Exploratory Bibliometrics: Using VOSviewer as a Preliminary Research Tool. Publications, 11(1), 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications11010010
  47. Levitt, J. M., & Thelwall, M. (2009). Citation levels and collaboration within library and information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(3), 434–442. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21000
  48. Lorch, J., & Mauk, M. (2025). Civil society, public support, and democratic recession in India, Indonesia, and the Philippines. Democratization, 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2025.2464902
  49. Mahendra, Y. I. (2021). Paradoks Demokrasi di Indonesia Tahun 2014-2019: Analisis Prosedural dan Substansial. Paradigma POLISTAAT: Jurnal Ilmu Sosial Dan Ilmu Politik, 4(1), 27–47. https://doi.org/10.23969/paradigmapolistaat.v4i1.2214
  50. Mahpudin, M. (2020). Demokrasi dan Kebangkitan Politik Identitas: Refleksi Perjalanan Demokrasi Indonesia Pasca Orde Baru. Ijd-Demos, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.31506/ijd.v1i1.1
  51. Mariač, D., Noumen, N. M. N., Monsur, A. A., Kolosko, T., John-Agu, D. C., Bernatas, D., Masoka, B. W., Udo, G. E., & Sever, F. (2024). Impactful Nature of Social Media on The Movement of Democracy in Vilnius of Lithuania: A Potential Merit and A Looming Threat to Democracy (4th ed.). Vilnius Business College. https://doi.org/10.57005/ab.2024.4.7
  52. Merriman, H. (2023). Civil Resistance. In H. Merriman, Oxford Research Encyclopedia of International Studies. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190846626.013.737
  53. Nugroho, H. (2015). Demokrasi dan Demokratisasi: Sebuah Kerangka Konseptual Untuk Memahami Dinamika Sosial-Politik di Indonesia. Jurnal Pemikiran Sosiologi, 1(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.22146/jps.v1i1.23419
  54. Nurasa, H., Abdillah, A., Adikancana, Q. M., & Widianingsih, I. (2024). Organization ecosystem for inclusive development in Indonesia: A bibliometric analysis and literature review. Cogent Social Sciences, 10(1), 2368949. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2024.2368949
  55. OECD. (2022). Building Trust to Reinforce Democracy (1st ed). Organization for Economic Cooperation & Development. https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2022/07/building-trust-to-reinforce-democracy_1a87cc66/b407f99c-en.pdf
  56. OECD. (2024). The OECD Reinforcing Democracy Initiative: Monitoring Report – Assessing Progress and Charting the Way Forward. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/9543bcfb-en
  57. Olaniran, B., & Williams, I. (2020). Social Media Effects: Hijacking Democracy and Civility in Civic Engagement. In J. Jones & M. Trice (Eds.), Platforms, Protests, and the Challenge of Networked Democracy (pp. 77–94). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36525-7_5
  58. Orduña-Malea, E., & Delgado-López-Cózar, E. (2018). Dimensions: Redescubriendo el ecosistema de la información científica. El Profesional de La Información, 27(2), 420. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2018.mar.21
  59. Palmblad, M., & Van Eck, N. J. (2018). Bibliometric Analyses Reveal Patterns of Collaboration between ASMS Members. Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, 29(3), 447–454. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13361-017-1846-1
  60. Papacharissi, Z. (2010). A private sphere: Democracy in a digital age. Polity Press
  61. Pepinsky, T. B. (2025). Introduction to the Special Section on Presidentialism and Democracy in Indonesia. Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 18681034251385602. https://doi.org/10.1177/18681034251385602
  62. Perianes-Rodriguez, A., Waltman, L., & Van Eck, N. J. (2016). Constructing bibliometric networks: A comparison between full and fractional counting. Journal of Informetrics, 10(4), 1178–1195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2016.10.006
  63. Prapto Raharja, D. & Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (Eds.). (2020). Demokrasi dan inklusifitas: Refleksi dari Forum Media dan Masyarakat Sipil 2019. Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (FES) Kantor Perwakilan Indonesia
  64. Qodir, Z. (2025). Conservative turn and political identity: Challenges to democracy in Indonesia after presidential election 2019. Identities, 32(3), 370–387. https://doi.org/10.1080/1070289X.2024.2415220
  65. Rachman, M. Z., Putra, A. S., Debora, S., & Rachmawati, T. (2024). BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS OF BUREAUCRACY IN INDONESIA. JianE (Jurnal Ilmu Administrasi Negara), 6(2), 72–89. https://doi.org/10.32938/jan.v6i2.2821
  66. Rosser, A., Roesad, K., & Edwin, D. (2005). Indonesia: The politics of inclusion. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 35(1), 53–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472330580000041
  67. Rossini, P. (2023). Reassessing the role of inclusion in political communication. Political Communication, 40(5), 676–680. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2023.2220666
  68. Sahoo, J., Mohanty, B., Biswal, O., Dash, N. K., & Sahu, J. K. (2019). Authorship trend and content analysis: A case study on highly cited articles in library and information science journals. Performance Measurement and Metrics, 21(1), 33–51. https://doi.org/10.1108/PMM-06-2019-0021
  69. Shaffira, N., Dharmayanti, N. P. G., Gantira, M., Rahmani, M. F. S., & Syaifuddin, M. (2024). Analisis bibliometrik: Perkembangan penelitian agenda setting dan political communication. Comdent: Communication Student Journal, 2(1), 100–119. https://doi.org/10.24198/comdent.v2i1.54407
  70. Sindre, G. M. (2017). Civic Engagement and Democracy in Post-Suharto Indonesia: A Review of Musrenbang, the Kecamatan Development Programme, and Labour Organising. PCD Journal, 4(1–2), 1. https://doi.org/10.22146/pcd.25766
  71. Subekti, D., Mutiarin, D., & Nurmandi, A. (2023). Political Communication in Social Media: A Bibliometrics Analysis. Studies in Media and Communication, 11(6), 299. https://doi.org/10.11114/smc.v11i6.6214
  72. Sudrajat, D., Iskandar, D., & Makarim, F. H. (2022, May 27). Lemahnya sistem pendanaan riset di Indonesia semakin terasa di tengah pandemi: Berikut pengalaman para dosen. The Conversation. https://doi.org/10.64628/AAN.hde6yk4c7
  73. Sukmayadi, V. (2019). The Dynamics of Media Landscape and Media Policy in Indonesia. Asia Pacific Media Educator, 29(1), 58–67. https://doi.org/10.1177/1326365X19844853
  74. Sumaiyah, S., Abdullah, A., Jayus, J., Yazid, Y., Astuti, D., Khairi, A., & Edison, E. (2024). Building Hope in Crisis: Global Public Service Broadcaster Innovation During the Covid-19 Pandemic. ARISTO, 13(1), 128–154. https://doi.org/10.24269/ars.v13i1.9004
  75. Sumartias, S., Dewi, E. A. S., Sjoraida, D. F., Budiana, H. R., & Ratnasari, E. (2025). From memes to activism: A bibliometric analysis of digital democracy research in Indonesia (2014-2024). Ethiopian Renaissance Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 12(1), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.4314/erjssh.v12i1.1
  76. Thelwall, M. (2021). MEASURING SOCIETAL IMPACTS OF RESEARCH WITH ALTMETRICS? COMMON PROBLEMS AND MISTAKES. Journal of Economic Surveys, 35(5), 1302–1314. https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12381
  77. Thurber, C., & Firawati, T. (2022). Civil Resistance and Inclusive Democratization in Indonesia. CSIS Commentaries PSC-014-EN. https://s3-csis-web.s3.ap-southeast-1.amazonaws.com/doc/PSC_014_EN_ThurberFirawati.pdf?download=1
  78. Tudor, M., & Slater, D. (2016). The contentious transition to democracy: Civil society, representation, and political inclusion in Southeast Asia. World Politics, 68(2), 229–276. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043887115000437
  79. Van Aelst, P., Strömbäck, J., Aalberg, T., Esser, F., De Vreese, C., Matthes, J., Hopmann, D., Salgado, S., Hubé, N., Stępińska, A., Papathanassopoulos, S., Berganza, R., Legnante, G., Reinemann, C., Sheafer, T., & Stanyer, J. (2017). Political communication in a high-choice media environment: A challenge for democracy? Annals of the International Communication Association, 41(1), 3–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2017.1288551
  80. Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2007). VOS: A New Method for Visualizing Similarities Between Objects. In R. Decker & H.-J. Lenz (Eds.), Advances in Data Analysis (pp. 299–306). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-70981-7_34
  81. Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523–538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3
  82. van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2014). Visualizing Bibliometric Networks. In Y. Ding, R. Rousseau, & D. Wolfram (Eds.), Measuring Scholarly Impact: Methods and Practice (pp. 285–320). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10377-8_13
  83. Van Eck, N. J., Waltman, L., Dekker, R., & Van Den Berg, J. (2010). A comparison of two techniques for bibliometric mapping: Multidimensional scaling and VOS. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(12), 2405–2416. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21421
  84. Visser, M., Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2021). Large-scale comparison of bibliographic data sources: Scopus, Web of Science, Dimensions, Crossref, and Microsoft Academic. Quantitative Science Studies, 2(1), 20–41. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00112
  85. Wagle, U. R. (2009). Inclusive Democracy and Economic Inequality in South Asia: Any Discernible Link? Review of Social Economy, 67(3), 329–357. https://doi.org/10.1080/00346760902908617
  86. Waltman, L., & Van Eck, N. J. (2013). A smart local moving algorithm for large-scale modularity-based community detection. The European Physical Journal B, 86(11), 471. https://doi.org/10.1140/epjb/e2013-40829-0
  87. Waltman, L., Van Eck, N. J., & Noyons, E. C. M. (2010). A unified approach to mapping and clustering of bibliometric networks. Journal of Informetrics, 4(4), 629–635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.07.002
  88. Widayat, R. M., Nurmandi, A., Rosilawati, Y., Natshir, H., Syamsurrijal, M., & Baharuddin, T. (2022). Bibliometric analysis and visualization articles on presidential election in social media indexed in Scopus by Indonesian authors. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Social Science Research (W-SHARE 2021). https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.220402.032
  89. Young, I. M. (2002a). Inclusion and democracy. Oxford University Press
  90. Young, I. M. (2002b). Inclusive Political Communication. In I. M. Young, Inclusion and Democracy (1st ed., pp. 52–80). Oxford University PressOxford. https://doi.org/10.1093/0198297556.003.0003
  91. Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429–472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629

Last update:

No citation recorded.

Last update: 2026-07-23 18:19:39

No citation recorded.