Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37303914›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2023

Talent identification research: a bibliometric study from multidisciplinary and global perspectives.

Fabio Andres Parra-Martinez, Jonathan Wai

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Fabio Andres Parra-MartinezWai Lab, Department of Education Reform, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, United States.
Jonathan WaiWai Lab, Department of Education Reform, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper describes the general status, trends, and evolution of research on talent identification across multiple fields globally over the last 80 years. Using Scopus and Web of Science databases, we explored patterns of productivity, collaboration, and knowledge structures in talent identification (TI) research. Bibliometric analysis of 2,502 documents revealed talent identification research is concentrated in the fields of management, business, and leadership (~37%), sports and sports science (~20%), and education, psychology, and STEM (~23%). Whereas research in management and sports science has occurred independently, research in psychology and education has created a bridge for the pollination of ideas across fields. Thematic evolution analysis indicates that TI has well developed motor and basic research themes focused on assessment, cognitive abilities, fitness, and youth characteristics. Motor themes in management and sports science bring attention to talent management beyond TI. Emerging research focuses on equity and diversity as well as innovation in identification and technology-based selection methods. Our paper contributes to the development of the body of TI research by (a) highlighting the role of TI across multiple disciplines, (b) determining the most impactful sources and authors in TI research, and (c) tracing the evolution of TI research which identifies gaps and future opportunities for exploring and developing TI research and its broader implications for other areas of research and society.

Indexed as

bibliometricsgifted educationmanagement and businessmultidisciplinary researchsportstalent identification

Identifiers

PMID37303914
PMCPMC10248246

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.