A bibliometric and visual analysis of hospitality and tourism marketing research from 2000–2020

Abstract

PurposeThis study aimed to bibliometrically and visually analyze and review hospitality and tourism marketing studies published from 2000–2020.Design/methodology/approachA total of 3,942 articles collected from the databases of Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) and Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-E) in the Web of Science (WoS) along with their references were used for analyses. The bibliometric software HistCiteTM and literature measurement visualization tools, VOSviewer and CiteSpace, were employed to analyze the selected articles.FindingsThe results of the study demonstrated top influential scholars and institutions, intellectual structure and emerging trends of the study topics, and future research opportunities in the field of hospitality and tourism marketing.Research limitations/implicationsFirst, academic influence of a scholar was evaluated by citations of his/her publications, which did not take the order of authorship into consideration. Second, this study was restricted to the English language journals. Third, other types of published documents related to the studied field such as review papers were not considered by this research.Originality/valueIn comparison to traditional qualitative analysis such as content analysis, bibliometric analysis is a more objective approach to vividly demonstrate trends and performance of a research field, offers unique insights for its advancement with wider inclusiveness of a larger amount of data.

Value co-creation and destination brand equity: understanding the role of social commerce information sharing

“…Value co-creation theorisation is gradually becoming an established construct in several research fields including tourism. It is predominantly guided by the “new service-dominant logic” perspective (Chathoth et al , 2016; Font et al , 2021; Liu et al , 2022a, b; Vargo and Lusch, 2004, 2016). Under this approach to customer engagement, “the customer is always at the heart of the value co-creation process” (Font et al , 2021; Liu et al , 2022a, b).…”

“…It is worth stating that the application and measurement of co-creation has predominantly been from the traditional marketing sciences perspective (Nambisan and Baron, 2009; Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2004; Vargo and Lusch, 2004). However, it is beginning to gain traction in tourism research (Kim et al , 2018; Liu et al , 2022a, b; Prebensen and Xie, 2017). Value co-creation was first introduced to hospitality and tourism literature in 2009 (Carvalho and Alves, 2022).…”

“…Destination brand equity is also a construct that is yet to be fully investigated (Liu et al , 2022a, b), specifically from emerging tourist destination contexts (Giannopoulos et al , 2021; Merrilees, 2016; Šerić and Mikulić, 2020; Xu and Chan, 2010). Theorisation of technology’s impact on destination brand equity is also considered limited regardless of its importance in the platformisation of value co-creation (Kennedy and Guzmán, 2017; Preko et al , 2022) and engagement (Buonincontri et al , 2017b; Lu et al , 2019).…”

A bibliometric analysis of research on tourism content marketing: Background knowledge and thematic evolution

“…Therefore, a quantitative literature review may improve the understanding of a field and reveal, over time, the main discussions in previous studies and their relationships [ 17 ]. In addition, Liu et al [ 18 ] concluded that it was crucial to identify existing intellectual structures from scientific publications and focus efforts on topics of great interest in the era as this could improve academic impact and establish scholars’ reputations. Thus, quantitative assessments of research areas that have long-term coverage and reveal vast information are urgently required [ 18 ].…”

“…In addition, Liu et al [ 18 ] concluded that it was crucial to identify existing intellectual structures from scientific publications and focus efforts on topics of great interest in the era as this could improve academic impact and establish scholars’ reputations. Thus, quantitative assessments of research areas that have long-term coverage and reveal vast information are urgently required [ 18 ]. Meanwhile, the bibliometric method includes co-citation analysis that allows the identification of knowledge structures based on scientific mapping [ 19 ].…”