Human–Computer Interaction (2000–2026): Scopus-Based Bibliometric Mapping of Core Topics and Methodological Trends
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58812/wsist.v4i01.2829Keywords:
Human–Computer Interaction, Bibliometric Analysis, Scopus, VOSviewer, Methodological TrendsAbstract
In this paper, bibliometric methods have been applied to analyze the development and knowledge structures of Human–Computer Interaction (HCI) from 2000 to 2026. The Scopus database was used for data acquisition and VOSviewer software was employed for visualizing research collaboration patterns, identifying prominent papers, and examining keyword trends in HCI research. Co-authorship, citation, and keywords co-occurrences were applied for analyzing the development of HCI. Results indicated that over time, the main focus of HCI research changed from usability and user interface issues to more advanced topics like integration of artificial intelligence technologies, deep learning, and domain-specific applications such as health-care sciences. Regarding collaboration among researchers in HCI, results depicted strong clusters of research inside this field with some connections to the outside world. Furthermore, the main reason for the high number of citations was the use of methodological tools that could be applied in all other fields and were considered generalizable. Overall, the findings of this study indicated the increasing trend towards developing an intelligent and adaptive HCI system based on machine learning.
References
[1] Z. Ding, Y. Ji, Y. Gan, Y. Wang, and Y. Xia, “Current status and trends of technology, methods, and applications of Human–Computer Intelligent Interaction (HCII): A bibliometric research,” Multimed. Tools Appl., vol. 83, no. 27, pp. 69111–69144, 2024.
[2] X. Zhao, S. Zhang, D. Nan, J. Han, and J. H. Kim, “Human–computer interaction in healthcare: a bibliometric analysis with CiteSpace,” in Healthcare, MDPI, 2024, p. 2467.
[3] J. Wang, R. Cheng, M. Liu, and P.-C. Liao, “Research trends of human–computer interaction studies in construction hazard recognition: a bibliometric review,” Sensors, vol. 21, no. 18, p. 6172, 2021.
[4] K. Koumaditis and T. Hussain, “Human computer interaction research through the lens of a bibliometric analysis,” in International conference on human-computer interaction, Springer, 2017, pp. 23–37.
[5] F. E. Sandnes, “A bibliometric study of human–computer interaction research activity in the Nordic-Baltic Eight countries,” Scientometrics, vol. 126, no. 6, pp. 4733–4767, 2021.
[6] T. Qiu, S. Qian, and X. Chen, “Research hotspots and trends of user-centered human-computer interaction: a bibliometric analysis,” in International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, Springer, 2024, pp. 161–177.
[7] Y. Zhang, Y. Cao, Y. Liu, and X. Hu, “Intelligent human-computer interaction interface: a bibliometric analysis of 2010–2022,” in International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, Springer, 2023, pp. 590–604.
[8] P. Shannon et al., “Cytoscape: a software environment for integrated models of biomolecular interaction networks,” Genome Res., vol. 13, no. 11, pp. 2498–2504, 2003.
[9] Y. Zhang et al., “Model-based analysis of ChIP-Seq (MACS),” Genome Biol., vol. 9, no. 9, p. R137, 2008.
[10] J. C. Barrett, B. Fry, J. Maller, and M. J. Daly, “Haploview: analysis and visualization of LD and haplotype maps,” Bioinformatics, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 263–265, 2005.
[11] D. M. Pardoll, “The blockade of immune checkpoints in cancer immunotherapy,” Nat. Rev. cancer, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 252–264, 2012.
[12] Y. Zhou et al., “Metascape provides a biologist-oriented resource for the analysis of systems-level datasets,” Nat. Commun., vol. 10, no. 1, p. 1523, 2019.
[13] Z. Tang, C. Li, B. Kang, G. Gao, C. Li, and Z. Zhang, “GEPIA: a web server for cancer and normal gene expression profiling and interactive analyses,” Nucleic Acids Res., vol. 45, no. W1, pp. W98–W102, 2017.
[14] S. Deterding, D. Dixon, R. Khaled, and L. Nacke, “From game design elements to gamefulness: defining" gamification",” in Proceedings of the 15th international academic MindTrek conference: Envisioning future media environments, 2011, pp. 9–15.
[15] D. S. Wishart et al., “DrugBank 5.0: a major update to the DrugBank database for 2018,” Nucleic Acids Res., vol. 46, no. D1, pp. D1074–D1082, 2018.
[16] S. Tyanova et al., “The Perseus computational platform for comprehensive analysis of (prote) omics data,” Nat. Methods, vol. 13, no. 9, pp. 731–740, 2016.
[17] D. Szklarczyk et al., “The STRING database in 2021: customizable protein–protein networks, and functional characterization of user-uploaded gene/measurement sets,” Nucleic Acids Res., vol. 49, no. D1, pp. D605–D612, 2021.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Loso Judijanto
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Facebook 
Instagram 
Twitter 
Youtube 
westscience.journals@gmail.com