Assessing the diffusion of nanotechnology in turkey

Assessing the diffusion of nanotechnology in Turkey: A social

network analysis approach

Hamid DarvishLecturer Cankaya University

PhD Candidate.Hacettepe UniversityDepartment of Infortmation Management

Ankara, Turkey

Out Line Introdcution Research questions Data and methods Finding and discussion Conclusion

What is nanotechnology

Mehta stated (2002) that nanoscience is about creation and manipulation of information and nanotechnology is an application which is based on nanoscience principles.

The term “nano” refers to particles as small as molecules in a size of 10-9 of a meter.

Why nanotechnology European Union Scientific Framework

(EUSF) has invested tremendously in nanotechnology since 2000

The Turkish government also has adopted a new approach by becoming part of the EUSF and has invested heavily in research and development.

Turkey included nanotechnology in its national 2023 Technology Foresight Program (Saritaş et al., 2007).

Nanotechnology continues United Nations defined nanotechnology

as one of the important recent breakthroughs in science

Positive impact on developed and poor countries For example

Water purification in poor countries Develop better computer devices

Knowledge( nanotechnology) diffusion

Rogers (2003) pioneered and studied innovation diffusion in several fields. He defines the diffusion of an innovation as "the process by which an innovation is communicated through certain channels over time among the members of a social system.“

Invisible colleges (Co-authorship) Bilkent and Hacettepe Universities

Why social network analysis

De Solla Price (1965) argued in his paper published in Science magazine that patterns of bibliometric data in scientific communication indicate the scientific development in different research domains.

Citation analysis alone does not suffice to explain the structure of the network of collaboration among scientists.

Social network analysis continues

Betweenness centrality Burt (2004) coined the term “structural

hole” Chen et al. (2009) stated that scientific

discovery comes with a group of specialist, who attend, read and cite same body of literature and attends same conference

Co-word analysis (Callon et al., 1983) Collaboration (Moody 2004)

Research questions

Who is the productive author in each social structure network?

To what extend do scientists in each network structure co-operate in scientific activities?

What are the research topics studied in each network structure?

Data and methods

Retrieved 167 and 230 bibliographic data for Hacettepe and Bilkent Universities during 2000-2010.

Ucinet (Borgatti, Everett, & Freeman, 2002) is used to calculate the statistical data: betweenness, degree centrality.

CiteSpace, developed by Dr. Chen is used to map the development of co-authorship of scientists.

Results and discussion

Figure 1. Network of co-authorship in Bilkent University including its subject categories

Data and discussion continues

Figure 2. Network of co-authorship in Hacettepe University including its subject categories

Data and discussion continues

Figure 3. Network of co-word frequency in Bilkent University

Data and discussion continues

Figure 4. Network of co-word frequency in Hacettepe University

Conclusion Mapped the structural and temporal

evolution Identified the productive authors Nodes having higher betweenness

centrality boost the diffusion process Co-word frequency analysis No shared researched activities

between two university

Future works Include all universities in Turkey Compare the results from my research

with results from WoS analysis tools