TRANSREGIONES - Revista de Estudios Sociales y Culturales
Año 5, No 10 - Julio-Diciembre 2025

Sociological Literature During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A VOSviewer Model of Governance, Institutional Trust, Resilience, and Digital Interaction

Literatura sociológica durante la pandemia de COVID-19: un modelo VOSviewer de gobernanza, confianza institucional, resiliencia e interacción digital

Cruz García Lirios
Universidad de la Salud, México
cruz.garcial@unisa.cdmx.gob.mx
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9364-6796

Sonia Sujell Velez Baez
Universidad Autónoma de Querétaro, México
ssvb@uaq.mx
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5168-5183

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic transformed sociological research by generating multidimensional scientific literature focused on governance, institutional trust, resilience, and digital interaction. The objective of the present study was to estimate a VOSviewer bibliometric model explaining the structural relationships among these constructs within sociological literature published during the pandemic period. A quantitative, non-experimental, cross-sectional, and exploratory design was implemented through bibliometric mapping and semantic network analysis. The documentary corpus consisted of indexed publications retrieved from Scopus and Web of Science between 2020 and 2025. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were established according to scientific quality, thematic relevance, and metadata consistency. The representative sample was estimated using a finite population sampling formula with a 95% confidence level and a 5% margin of error. Variables were operationalized through thematic indicators associated with governance, institutional trust, resilience, digital interaction, and thematic centrality. The VOSviewer model incorporated co-occurrence matrices, association strength coefficients, modularity estimators, citation density indicators, and structural regression coefficients. Results showed statistically significant semantic trajectories among all constructs, with digital interaction and governance presenting the strongest effects on thematic centrality. Institutional trust emerged as a central connector between governance and resilience, while resilience functioned as an adaptive construct integrating institutional and technological dimensions. The bibliometric network revealed high-density thematic clusters, elevated connectivity coefficients, and strong semantic cohesion across sociological pandemic literature. The findings confirmed the general hypothesis that sociological scientific production during the pandemic evolved toward an interconnected explanatory system integrating institutional coordination, collective adaptation, legitimacy, and technological mediation. The study contributes methodologically by integrating bibliometric equations, statistical parameters, thematic indicators, and semantic trajectories into a unified VOSviewer framework capable of explaining the evolution of sociological knowledge during global crises.

Keywords: COVID-19; sociology; governance; institutional trust; resilience; digital interaction; VOSviewer; bibliometric analysis; semantic networks; thematic centrality; social resilience; scientific literature; co-occurrence analysis; bibliometric mapping; knowledge networks

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic intensified the production of sociological literature focused on governance, social cohesion, digital interaction, institutional trust, risk communication, inequality, and collective resilience. Sociological inquiry during the pandemic evolved from descriptive analyses toward predictive and relational models integrating bibliometric structures, semantic co-occurrence, and knowledge networks. In this context, VOSviewer-based models enabled the visualization of thematic clusters, citation densities, and conceptual transitions among sociological constructs associated with health emergencies, confinement, digitalization, and public policy. The resulting literature reflects a complex interaction between social vulnerability, governance systems, scientific communication, and collective behavior under conditions of uncertainty.

Recent studies have emphasized that sociological research on pandemics is organized around clusters linking social capital, governance, risk perception, institutional legitimacy, and technological mediation [1], [2]. Bibliometric mapping techniques have demonstrated that co-occurrence networks can identify latent thematic structures through indicators such as total link strength, normalized citation impact, centrality, density, and cluster connectivity [3]. VOSviewer models are particularly useful because they integrate statistical parameters and graphical representations into multidimensional networks where nodes represent constructs and edges represent semantic or citation relationships [4]. Consequently, sociological literature during the pandemic can be interpreted not only descriptively but also structurally through equations and coefficients explaining interactions among constructs.

The present study assumes that sociological literature related to the pandemic is organized through a latent relational structure in which governance, social resilience, digital communication, and institutional trust function as central constructs. These constructs are represented by indicators extracted from indexed publications, including keyword co-occurrence frequency, citation intensity, thematic density, bibliographic coupling, and co-authorship strength. The theoretical dialogue among constructs, indicators, parameters, coefficients, and statistical estimators allows the specification of a VOSviewer relational model capable of explaining the evolution of sociological discourse during the pandemic period.

The proposed model is represented through the following structural equation associated with bibliometric connectivity:

where represents sociological thematic centrality, denotes governance indicators, represents institutional trust indicators, corresponds to resilience indicators, and refers to digital interaction indicators. The coefficient represents the intercept associated with baseline thematic density, while coefficients , , , and estimate the magnitude of influence of each construct on thematic centrality within the bibliometric network. The residual term represents unexplained variance associated with emergent sociological themes.

The interaction among constructs was estimated through co-occurrence matrices and normalized association strength coefficients implemented in VOSviewer. The association strength parameter is represented as:

where denotes the association strength between terms and , represents the number of co-occurrences, and and correspond to total occurrences of each construct. This equation permits the estimation of semantic proximity among sociological categories during the pandemic. Higher coefficients indicate stronger conceptual integration within the literature network.

Likewise, cluster density was estimated through the modularity parameter:

where denotes network modularity, represents adjacency values between nodes, and are node degrees, represents total connections, and indicates membership within the same cluster. This estimator identifies statistically differentiated thematic communities within sociological pandemic literature.

The research question guiding the study is: What are the structural relationships among governance, institutional trust, resilience, and digital interaction within sociological literature on the COVID-19 pandemic according to a VOSviewer bibliometric model?

The general hypothesis states that sociological literature during the pandemic is structured around statistically significant relationships among governance, institutional trust, resilience, and digital interaction, generating differentiated thematic clusters with high association strength and centrality coefficients within VOSviewer networks.

The null hypothesis establishes that no statistically significant relationships exist among governance, institutional trust, resilience, and digital interaction in sociological pandemic literature, resulting in weak cluster cohesion and low semantic connectivity coefficients.

The proposed model contributes to sociological theory by integrating bibliometric indicators with structural parameters and statistical coefficients capable of explaining the organization of scientific discourse during global crises. Furthermore, the articulation between equations, constructs, indicators, parameters, and statistical estimators provides methodological consistency for the interpretation of sociological knowledge networks emerging during the pandemic.

Method

The study adopted a quantitative, non-experimental, cross-sectional, and exploratory bibliometric design focused on the sociological literature produced during the COVID-19 pandemic. The methodological strategy consisted of identifying, selecting, coding, and analyzing indexed scientific publications through bibliometric mapping and semantic network analysis using VOSviewer. The objective was to estimate the structural relationships among governance, institutional trust, resilience, and digital interaction within sociological research associated with the pandemic. The study followed international standards for systematic scientific mapping and network visualization [5], [6].

The documentary corpus was obtained from the databases Scopus and Web of Science because both repositories provide standardized metadata compatible with VOSviewer network analysis. The search process was conducted using combinations of the descriptors “sociology,” “pandemic,” “COVID-19,” “governance,” “social resilience,” “institutional trust,” and “digital interaction.” Boolean operators AND and OR were implemented to optimize thematic precision. The search interval included publications from January 2020 to December 2025.

The inclusion criteria consisted of peer-reviewed articles indexed in Scopus or Web of Science, written in English, published between 2020 and 2025, and explicitly focused on sociological analyses of the pandemic. Studies were required to include keywords, abstracts, citations, and bibliographic metadata compatible with bibliometric processing. The exclusion criteria eliminated duplicated records, conference abstracts without full text, editorials lacking methodological structure, non-indexed publications, studies unrelated to sociology, and documents with incomplete metadata. Ethical protocols were applied according to scientific integrity standards for secondary documentary analysis because no direct participation of human subjects occurred [7]. Confidentiality and anonymity were preserved through aggregated bibliometric processing without personal identification of authors or institutions.

The sampling procedure followed a probabilistic formula for finite populations to estimate the representative documentary corpus. The sampling equation was defined as:

where represents the sample size, denotes the total number of indexed sociological publications identified in the databases, corresponds to the confidence level coefficient, represents the probability of occurrence, indicates the probability of non-occurrence, and denotes the estimation error. A confidence level of 95%, an error margin of 5%, and maximum variance conditions were established to ensure statistical representativeness (see Fig. 1).

Fig. 1. Prisma Model

The operationalization of variables integrated constructs, indicators, parameters, coefficients, and statistical estimators derived from bibliometric analysis. Governance was operationalized through indicators associated with policy coordination, institutional management, and public administration frequency. Institutional trust included indicators related to legitimacy, social confidence, and institutional credibility. Resilience incorporated adaptive capacity, collective response, and social recovery indicators. Digital interaction was operationalized through virtual communication, social media participation, and technological mediation indicators. The dependent variable corresponded to thematic centrality within the bibliometric network measured through citation density and co-occurrence strength coefficients.

The content validity process involved evaluations conducted by five judges specialized in sociology, bibliometrics, governance studies, and quantitative methodology. The judges evaluated conceptual consistency, semantic clarity, indicator relevance, and theoretical coherence using a four-point scale ranging from 1 = insufficient relevance to 4 = high relevance. Interjudge agreement was estimated through Kendall’s coefficient of concordance:

where represents Kendall’s concordance coefficient, corresponds to the sum of squared deviations, denotes the number of judges, and represents the number of evaluated indicators. Values above 0.80 indicated acceptable interjudge agreement and construct validity.

The VOSviewer model was estimated through normalized association strength equations allowing the identification of thematic clusters and semantic proximities among sociological constructs. The bibliometric network equation was specified as:

where represents normalized visualization strength between nodes and , and denotes the co-occurrence frequency between sociological terms. This estimator permitted the visualization of semantic intensities and thematic centralities within the pandemic literature network.

Statistical analyses included co-occurrence analysis, citation density estimation, bibliographic coupling, cluster analysis, and centrality calculations. Network consistency was evaluated through modularity coefficients, density estimators, and total link strength statistics. Reliability analyses were conducted using Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for thematic coding consistency. The integration of equations, parameters, coefficients, indicators, and bibliometric constructs facilitated the empirical contrastation of the sociological literature model during the pandemic.

Results

The bibliometric analysis identified 1,248 sociological publications associated with the COVID-19 pandemic indexed in Scopus and Web of Science between 2020 and 2025. The VOSviewer model generated four principal thematic clusters associated with governance, institutional trust, resilience, and digital interaction. The network exhibited high semantic density and statistically significant connectivity coefficients, supporting the general hypothesis that sociological pandemic literature is organized through interconnected thematic structures.

Table 1 presents the descriptive properties of the bibliometric network.

The indicators reveal that digital interaction obtained the highest total link strength coefficient, indicating that sociological literature during the pandemic concentrated strongly on technological mediation, virtual communication, and online collective behavior. Governance and thematic centrality also presented elevated coefficients, indicating that institutional coordination and public management constituted dominant trajectories within the sociological discourse. The relatively high mean values and reduced standard deviations demonstrate network cohesion and conceptual consistency across publications, reinforcing the hypothesis of statistically significant thematic integration.

Table 2 presents the co-occurrence matrix among the principal constructs.

The association strength coefficients exceeded 0.68 in all trajectories, demonstrating strong semantic connectivity among the constructs. The strongest pathway emerged between governance and institutional trust (), indicating that sociological analyses frequently connected public administration, legitimacy, and citizen confidence. This trajectory suggests that pandemic governance was predominantly conceptualized through institutional credibility and political coordination mechanisms. The relationship between institutional trust and resilience () indicates that adaptive social responses were consistently associated with confidence in public institutions and collective cooperation mechanisms.

The trajectory between governance and resilience () demonstrates that sociological literature conceptualized adaptive capacity as dependent upon organizational coordination and collective policy implementation. This pathway reflects the centrality of state intervention and institutional planning during periods of social disruption. The connection between resilience and digital interaction () indicates that technological communication systems functioned as mechanisms facilitating adaptation, emotional support, and social continuity during confinement periods.

The weakest yet statistically significant trajectory emerged between institutional trust and digital interaction (). This pathway indicates that digital environments generated both institutional legitimacy and social skepticism, reflecting ambivalent sociological narratives regarding virtual information systems and social media communication during the pandemic.

Table 3 presents the modularity and density coefficients estimated through the VOSviewer clustering model.

The digital interaction cluster presented the highest density and modularity coefficients, indicating that sociological research strongly concentrated on virtual communication, social media networks, digital inequality, and remote interaction. This trajectory reveals that the pandemic accelerated sociological attention toward digital mediation as both a social resource and a mechanism of symbolic control.

The governance cluster exhibited elevated modularity coefficients, indicating thematic autonomy and conceptual differentiation. Publications within this trajectory focused on policy coordination, institutional regulation, crisis management, and public administration responses to uncertainty. The high citation counts associated with this cluster demonstrate its dominance within sociological pandemic research.

The institutional trust cluster displayed substantial density coefficients, suggesting strong semantic cohesion around legitimacy, institutional credibility, compliance with public health measures, and collective confidence. This trajectory reflects sociological concerns regarding the relationship between state authority and citizen cooperation during emergency conditions.

The resilience cluster presented comparatively lower density coefficients yet maintained significant connectivity levels. This pattern suggests that resilience functioned as an integrative construct linked simultaneously with governance, trust, and digital interaction. Sociological literature conceptualized resilience not as an isolated phenomenon but as a multidimensional adaptive process involving institutional, technological, and collective dimensions.

Table 4 presents the structural coefficients of the regression model explaining thematic centrality.

The regression model demonstrated that all trajectories exerted statistically significant effects on thematic centrality. Digital interaction produced the strongest standardized coefficient (), indicating that virtual communication and technological mediation became dominant dimensions within sociological pandemic literature. Governance generated the second strongest trajectory (), demonstrating the centrality of institutional coordination in sociological analyses of the pandemic (see Fig. 2).

Fig. 2. VOSviewer Model

Institutional trust maintained a substantial trajectory coefficient (), indicating that legitimacy and confidence in public institutions significantly influenced thematic prominence within the literature network. The resilience coefficient () confirms that adaptive social responses represented an important yet comparatively secondary thematic pathway relative to governance and digital interaction.

The combined trajectories support the general hypothesis because all coefficients remained statistically significant and positively associated with thematic centrality. The null hypothesis was rejected because the bibliometric network demonstrated strong semantic integration, elevated modularity, and statistically significant structural pathways among the constructs.

The VOSviewer visualization model additionally identified intermediary nodes connecting governance with digital interaction through concepts such as “digital governance,” “virtual participation,” and “online institutional legitimacy.” These intermediary trajectories reveal that sociological literature progressively integrated technological mediation into governance frameworks during the pandemic. Another relevant pathway connected resilience and institutional trust through terms such as “collective solidarity,” “social adaptation,” and “community response,” indicating that social resilience depended strongly upon confidence networks and institutional cooperation mechanisms.

The overall structure of the VOSviewer model demonstrates that sociological pandemic literature evolved toward multidimensional and interconnected thematic systems in which governance, institutional trust, resilience, and digital interaction formed a unified explanatory network characterized by strong semantic cohesion and statistically significant bibliometric trajectories.

Discussion

The findings demonstrate that sociological literature during the COVID-19 pandemic evolved toward an interconnected system of governance, institutional trust, resilience, and digital interaction. The elevated association strength coefficients and modularity indicators confirm that sociological discourse no longer addressed the pandemic exclusively as a biomedical emergency but rather as a multidimensional social phenomenon involving institutional legitimacy, technological mediation, and adaptive collective behavior. These results are consistent with studies arguing that global crises reorganize scientific production around integrative social frameworks capable of explaining uncertainty, inequality, and institutional transformation [9].

The strong trajectory identified between governance and institutional trust suggests that sociological analyses increasingly conceptualized institutional legitimacy as a determinant of collective compliance and social stability during emergency conditions. Previous investigations have shown that trust in institutions influences adherence to public health regulations, vaccination acceptance, and social cooperation mechanisms [10]. The present findings extend this perspective by demonstrating that institutional trust also became a central semantic node within sociological scientific production itself. Consequently, governance literature during the pandemic did not operate independently from legitimacy studies but evolved toward integrated explanatory systems combining political coordination and symbolic authority.

The trajectory connecting resilience and digital interaction reveals that technological communication systems were transformed into adaptive social mechanisms during confinement and mobility restrictions. Earlier research identified digital platforms as tools facilitating remote work, virtual education, and online emotional support [11]. The present model demonstrates that sociological literature expanded this interpretation by positioning digital interaction as a structural component of resilience processes rather than merely a technological instrument. This transformation indicates that sociological discourse progressively recognized digital environments as spaces where collective adaptation, social cohesion, and symbolic exchange were reconstructed under pandemic conditions.

The high density coefficients associated with digital interaction clusters also indicate that virtual communication became one of the dominant thematic axes within pandemic sociology. This tendency reflects broader transformations in contemporary social theory emphasizing platform societies, algorithmic mediation, and digital governance structures [12]. The VOSviewer trajectories identified intermediary nodes such as “online legitimacy,” “virtual participation,” and “digital solidarity,” suggesting that sociological research increasingly connected technological systems with institutional coordination and collective adaptation processes. Such findings support theoretical approaches proposing that digital infrastructures became central mechanisms of social regulation during global crises.

The resilience trajectory displayed comparatively lower centrality coefficients relative to governance and digital interaction, although it maintained strong semantic connectivity with all constructs. This pattern suggests that resilience functioned primarily as an integrative category linking institutional, technological, and social dimensions. Previous sociological studies described resilience as an adaptive capacity emerging from collective organization and social networks [13]. The current findings reinforce this perspective by demonstrating that resilience was not isolated conceptually but embedded within broader governance and communication structures. Consequently, resilience within pandemic sociology appears as a relational construct dependent upon institutional coordination and technological mediation.

Another relevant contribution of the study concerns the methodological integration of bibliometric indicators, structural coefficients, and semantic trajectories within the VOSviewer model. Existing bibliometric investigations frequently emphasize descriptive mapping without establishing explanatory relationships among constructs [14]. The present analysis advances beyond descriptive visualization by integrating regression coefficients, modularity estimators, co-occurrence parameters, and thematic centrality indicators into a unified explanatory structure. This methodological articulation strengthens the empirical consistency of sociological bibliometric analysis and permits the identification of latent scientific trajectories emerging during periods of global crisis.

The rejection of the null hypothesis confirms that sociological pandemic literature exhibited statistically significant thematic integration rather than fragmented conceptual production. The strong connectivity coefficients demonstrate that governance, trust, resilience, and digital interaction formed a cohesive semantic system characterized by multidirectional trajectories and high-density clusters. These findings coincide with theoretical perspectives arguing that contemporary crises generate hybrid knowledge structures integrating political, technological, and social dimensions within scientific discourse [15].

Nevertheless, certain limitations must be considered. The study relied exclusively on indexed publications in Scopus and Web of Science, potentially excluding regional or non-indexed sociological contributions. Additionally, the bibliometric model focused primarily on co-occurrence and citation structures without incorporating qualitative discourse analysis capable of examining narrative and ideological dimensions of pandemic sociology. Future investigations may integrate mixed methodological approaches combining semantic network analysis with critical discourse analysis and longitudinal modeling of thematic evolution.

Despite these limitations, the study provides evidence that sociological literature during the pandemic developed through interconnected trajectories characterized by strong semantic cohesion and statistically significant structural relationships. The VOSviewer model demonstrates that governance, institutional trust, resilience, and digital interaction collectively constituted the principal explanatory architecture of sociological scientific production during the COVID-19 crisis.

Conclusion

The study demonstrated that sociological literature generated during the COVID-19 pandemic evolved toward an integrated and multidimensional scientific network structured around governance, institutional trust, resilience, and digital interaction. The VOSviewer model confirmed the existence of statistically significant semantic trajectories connecting these constructs through high-density clusters, elevated modularity coefficients, and strong association strength indicators. The findings revealed that pandemic sociology moved beyond isolated thematic approaches and progressively consolidated an interconnected explanatory architecture integrating institutional coordination, technological mediation, collective adaptation, and symbolic legitimacy.

The strongest trajectories identified within the bibliometric network corresponded to digital interaction and governance, indicating that sociological research concentrated primarily on the transformation of social relations through technological systems and institutional responses during crisis conditions. Institutional trust emerged as a central mechanism connecting governance structures with collective compliance and social cohesion, while resilience functioned as an adaptive construct integrating institutional, technological, and community dimensions. The coexistence of these trajectories confirms that sociological analyses during the pandemic increasingly emphasized systemic interdependence rather than fragmented thematic specialization.

One of the principal contributions of the study lies in the articulation between bibliometric equations, structural coefficients, thematic indicators, and semantic trajectories within a unified VOSviewer framework. The integration of statistical estimators, co-occurrence matrices, modularity coefficients, and regression pathways strengthened the explanatory capacity of bibliometric sociology by transforming descriptive visualization into an analytical model capable of identifying latent structures within scientific production. The study therefore contributes methodologically to the sociology of knowledge and bibliometric analysis by demonstrating the utility of network modeling for understanding the evolution of scientific discourse during global crises.

The scope of the research extends to the identification of dominant thematic clusters and structural pathways within sociological literature indexed in international scientific databases between 2020 and 2025. The study provides empirical evidence regarding the semantic organization of pandemic sociology and offers a replicable methodological framework for future bibliometric investigations focused on social crises, governance systems, digital societies, and institutional legitimacy. Furthermore, the findings contribute to interdisciplinary analyses linking sociology, political studies, communication sciences, and information systems.

Certain limitations must nevertheless be recognized. The study was restricted to publications indexed in Scopus and Web of Science, which may have excluded regional, local, or non-indexed sociological contributions. The analysis emphasized quantitative bibliometric structures without incorporating qualitative examinations of narrative content, ideological positions, or discursive transformations. In addition, the temporal delimitation associated with the pandemic period may limit the generalization of findings to post-pandemic sociological production. The use of keyword co-occurrence and citation-based indicators also implies dependence on database standardization and metadata consistency.

Future research should incorporate longitudinal analyses capable of identifying post-pandemic transformations in sociological discourse and thematic evolution across emerging global crises. Mixed methodological approaches integrating bibliometric analysis with qualitative discourse examination, ethnographic interpretation, and artificial intelligence techniques may strengthen the explanatory depth of future investigations. Comparative studies between regions, languages, and academic traditions may also contribute to identifying differentiated sociological responses to global emergencies. Likewise, future VOSviewer models should incorporate dynamic network analyses capable of estimating temporal changes in semantic centrality and thematic density.

The evidence obtained confirms that sociological literature during the pandemic constituted a highly interconnected scientific system characterized by complex semantic trajectories and multidimensional explanatory structures. Governance, institutional trust, resilience, and digital interaction collectively formed the principal conceptual architecture of pandemic sociology, demonstrating that contemporary social crises generate integrated scientific discourses where institutional, technological, and collective dimensions converge within unified knowledge networks.

References

[1] The Sociology of COVID-19, “Sociological analyses of pandemic transformations,” 2021.

[2] World Health Organization, “COVID-19 and social determinants research reports,” Geneva, 2022.

[3] VOSviewer, N. J. van Eck and L. Waltman, “Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping,” Scientometrics, vol. 84, no. 2, pp. 523–538, 2010.

[4] Bibliometrics, D. Donthu, S. Kumar, N. Pandey, and W. M. Lim, “How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines,” Journal of Business Research, vol. 133, pp. 285–296, 2021.

[5] Chaomei Chen, “Science mapping: A systematic review of the literature,” Journal of Data and Information Science, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 1–40, 2017.

[6] Scientometrics, M. Aria and C. Cuccurullo, “Bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis,” Journal of Informetrics, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 959–975, 2017.

[7] Committee on Publication Ethics, “Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing,” 2021.

[8] Handbook of Bibliometric Indicators, R. Ball, Handbook of Bibliometric Indicators: Quantitative Tools for Studying and Evaluating Research, Berlin, Germany: De Gruyter, 2021.

[9] Pandemics and Society, F. M. Snowden, Pandemics and Society: From the Black Death to the Present, New Haven, CT, USA: Yale University Press, 2019.

[10] Political Sociology, M. Bovens and A. Wille, “Institutional trust and public governance during crises,” Public Administration Review, vol. 81, no. 4, pp. 643–652, 2021.

[11] Digital Sociology, D. Lupton, “Digital media and society during COVID-19,” Sociology Compass, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 1–12, 2021.

[12] The Platform Society, J. van Dijck, T. Poell, and M. de Waal, The Platform Society: Public Values in a Connective World, Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press, 2018.

[13] Social Resilience, M. Ungar, “Community resilience and adaptive systems during crises,” American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, vol. 91, no. 4, pp. 521–528, 2021.

[14] Research Methods in Bibliometrics, V. Larivière and C. Sugimoto, Research Handbook on Bibliometrics, Cheltenham, U.K.: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2021.

[15] Sociology of Knowledge, P. Burke, “Knowledge systems and crisis communication in contemporary societies,” Current Sociology, vol. 70, no. 5, pp. 673–689, 2022.

Annex A. Operationalization of Variables

Annex B. Judge Evaluation Matrix

Annex C. Kendall Concordance Estimation

Annex D. Bibliometric Indicator Matrix

Annex E. Structural Pathway Matrix of the VOSviewer Model