SciMaps guide
Literature Discovery and Mapping
Published by SciMaps · Updated
Move from research discovery to a defined literature map, distinguishing direct citations from shared-reference and term relationships.
Discovery supplies candidates; mapping needs a defined selection
Literature discovery locates records that may help answer a research question. Literature mapping explores relationships within a chosen set. A search result is a candidate, not an inclusion decision, and a map cannot show papers or relationships missing from its data.
A practical task sequence
- Write the research question, inclusion criteria, date range and search terms. Keep a search log so others can understand how the collection was assembled.
- Use Research discovery to find papers and inspect their metadata and context. Review relevance instead of relying only on result position.
- Add relevant records to a literature project using supported source search or DOI import. Review duplicates and incomplete metadata before selecting sources.
- Choose a relationship: direct citations for citing-to-cited paths, coupling for shared references, or keyword co-occurrence for shared terms.
- Inspect connected papers, read them and update the selection using the same stated rules. Record exclusions and limits before reporting results.
Illustrative example
Suppose a selected collection contains Papers P, Q and R. P cites Q. P and R both cite Reference A, but neither cites the other. P and Q therefore have a directed citation link from P to Q; P and R have a shared-reference coupling relationship. Those are different observations. Shared references or terms are similarity signals, not directed citation evidence. Shared terms could produce another relationship without either citation being present.
In Direct Citation, paper nodes and arrows describe available citations in the analyzed scope. A missing arrow may reflect incomplete data or a paper outside the selected collection. The map is not an entire citation network.
Individual research example
A postgraduate researcher selects a defined collection of 50 papers on a narrow topic after screening candidates. They inspect direct citation paths for reading context and shared-reference links to find related approaches, checking each candidate against the same inclusion criteria.
Institutional example
A library team selects a defined collection of 100 eligible records for a thematic reading list supporting a center's workshop. They document topic, period, source coverage and affiliation checks. The map supports discovery within that selected collection; it is not a complete inventory of the institution's research.
Limitations
Search vocabulary, provider coverage and indexing delays affect what can be found. References may be incomplete. Citation links do not establish endorsement, and similarity does not establish identical content or quality. Network thresholds and graph limits can hide relevant records. Mapping assists a review; it does not replace systematic screening or critical reading.
References
- Garfield (1955), Citation indexes for science — citation associations as a route into literature.
- Kessler (1963), Bibliographic coupling between scientific papers — the shared-reference relationship.
Related tools
Related guides
Try the workflow in SciMaps
Build a project collection and select the sources for your analysis.
Create an accountCreate your account, then complete verification to start using SciMaps. Already have access? Sign in to SciMaps.