Abstract
To celebrate Human Resource Development Review’s (HRDR’s) 20th anniversary of publication, I was asked by the HRDR Editor-in-Chief to conduct a topic analysis of HRDR articles over the past two decades. The purpose of this study, therefore, is to identify major topics from all HRDR articles published from 2002–2021 by reviewing keywords and citation frequency. After identifying 394 articles (excluding editorials), the main topics and the most influential articles were identified. Literature review articles followed by employee engagement were the most frequently cited over the past 20 years. In the future, there is a need to conduct more in-depth analysis to better understand the relevant topics and influence of HRDR articles using accurate categories and advanced techniques.
Keywords
Human Resource Development Review (HRDR) has promoted theory development and methods in HRD and related fields by publishing non-empirical research articles since its inception in 2002 (Cho, 2021a; Holton, 2002). As HRDR’s unique strengths are related to theory building, scholars have often referred to HRDR when analyzing HRD research (Jo et al., 2009; Shirmohammadi et al., 2021; Yoo et al., 2019).
To celebrate HRDR’s 20th anniversary of publication, I was asked by the Editor-in-Chief of HRDR to conduct a topic analysis of HRDR articles over the past two decades. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to identify major topics from all HRDR articles published from 2002–2021by reviewing keywords and citation frequency. The research questions guiding this study are as follows: What are the key research topics in articles published in HRDR? and What articles have been the most frequently cited?
To answer these questions, 394 articles (excluding editorials) were identified and analyzed based on titles and keywords. An Excel spreadsheet was created to organize the article information including title, year, first author, keywords, and citation frequency. For topic analysis, the titles and keywords of all articles were reviewed. Keywords were counted based on the frequency. Among the keywords, human resource development or HRD was excluded because it is too broad to identify specific topics. Citations were also counted to determine (a) the relationship between frequently mentioned keywords and cited articles; and (b) the influence of HRDR on academia. The sources of the citations of each article were identified using Google Scholar as of November 1, 2021.
In this article, I first provide a summary of the main research topics identified in HRDR based on the frequency of keywords and then present HRDR’s top 20 most frequently cited articles published from 2002–2021. I conclude with a discussion, implications, limitations, and recommendations for future research.
Main Research Topics
In this section, the main topics of 394 articles were analyzed based on their titles and keywords. A total of 1226 keywords were extracted excluding 85 keywords (human resource development or HRD). After analyzing the 1226 keywords, 11 main topics were identified: (1) research and theory, (2) employees and outcomes, (3) organization development, (4) learning, training, and development, (5) critical perspectives, (6) sectors, (7) cross-cultural perspectives, (8) leadership, (9) careers, (10) national HRD and policy, and (11) others (e.g., countries, names, society, and religion).
Main Topics of HRDR Articles 2002–2021.
Most Cited Articles
Citation frequency assesses professional recognition and related value-added contributions in academia (Klein & Chiang, 2004; McCain, 1986). Therefore, examining the citation frequency of articles published in HRDR gives us an opportunity to understand the influence of articles on the HRD community and neighboring fields.
HRDR’s Top 20 Most Frequently Cited Articles 2002–2021.
Table 2 also shows the relationship between key themes in most frequently cited articles and the main topics in HRDR (in Table 1), including three articles focusing on research and theory (Rocco & Plakhotnik, 2009; Torraco, 2005, 2016), 11 articles on employees and their outcomes (Brewer & Shapard, 2004; Ipe, 2003; Mercurio, 2015; Luthans & Jensen, 2002; Luthans et al.,2006; Sachau, 2007; Shuck, 2011; Shuck & Herd, 2012; Shuck & Wollard, 2008; Stoof et al., 2002; Thijssen et al., 2008), two articles on organization development-related topics (Choi & Ruona, 2011; Lines, 2005), and four articles on learning, training, and development (Alvarez et al., 2004; Burke & & Hutchins, 2007; D’Abate et al., 2003; Joo, 2005).
Discussion
The major topics presented in this article highlight that HRDR has paid considerable attention to theory and research topics, such as research methods (80 keywords), theory building (68), theory (50), literature reviews (43), and the link between theory and practice (27), and disciplines (25). Research methods included basic research areas (e.g., epistemology, methodologies, research questions, research design, and validity), quantitative (e.g., factor analysis, measures, and meta-analysis), qualitative (e.g., autoethnography, ethnography, and phenomenology), and mixed methods. Theory focused on specific theories adopted in HRD (e.g., activity theory, learning theory, and resource-based theory). Theory building articles included theoretical foundations and theory development in HRD. Literature reviews included both general and specific types of reviews such as integrative, systematic, scoping, and structured literature reviews. Articles on the link between scholars and practitioners have focused on reducing the gap between them. Disciplines included HRD-related disciplines (e.g., economics and psychology).
The study findings are consistent with HRDR’s focus and its four types of non-empirical research articles (theory and conceptual articles, theory building research methods articles, foundations of HRD articles, and literature reviews) (Holton, 2002). HRDR has covered topics that have been commonly addressed in HRD (e.g., careers, learning, leadership, organization development, and performance) by allowing scholars to explore existing topics (e.g., employee behaviors and outcomes, training and development) and emerging topics (e.g., minority-related issues and diversity and inclusion) through non-empirical research articles.
Citation frequency analysis indicates that HRDR articles have been cited in diverse areas. For example, literature reviews (Torraco, 2005, 2016) have been cited more than 2800 times over the past 20 years. Research articles on employee engagement (Shuck, 2011; Shuck & Herd, 2012; Shuck & Wollard, 2008) have been cited more than 2000 times. Knowledge sharing (Ipe, 2003), training transfer (Burke & Hutchins, 2007), and resiliency (Luthans et al., 2006) have been cited more than 1000 times. Articles on major areas in HRD (e.g., training and development and organization development) have also been frequently cited. For instance, coaching (988 times) (D’Abate et al., 2003; Joo, 2005), organizational change (906 times) (Choi & Ruona, 2011; Lines, 2005), and training evaluation (699 times) (Alvarez et al., 2004) have been commonly cited topics in HRD (Shirmohammadi et al., 2021).
Among the 11 main topics (Table 1), articles on several topics (e.g., critical perspectives, cross-cultural perspectives, leadership, careers, and national HRD) were not counted as frequently cited articles (Table 2) because of the cutoff number (top 20). The extended list indicated that articles discussing these topics have had numerous citations including cross-cultural training (361 citations, the 23rd) (Littrell et al., 2006), team diversity (358 citations, the 24th) (Horwitz, 2005), leadership (267 citations, the 34th) (Carasco-Saul et al., 2015), career development (221 citations, the 38th) (McDonald & Hite, 2005), and national HRD (90 citations, the 98th) (Wang & Swanson, 2008).
Limitations and Recommendations
In this study, citation frequency provides descriptive information on the total citations over 20 years, which means that articles cited less than the top 20 articles were excluded regardless of their quality and significance. For example, Manuel London is among the most productive authors who has published eight articles on group/team learning in HRDR over the past two decades (e.g., London et al., 2005; London & Sessa, 2006). However, given that the total citations of his eight articles were less than 500 times, his work was not included in Table 2. Overlooking these seemingly important authors may be a downside of this descriptive approach to citation frequency.
In addition, I took a broad approach to categorizing topics and keywords. For instance, literature reviews in this study included both literature reviews and conceptual articles, although these two types of articles are quite different. In addition, performance, competence, and skills, for example, were categorized as one group for convenience. The same keywords used in different contexts (e.g., communication in organizational change and group process) were also not identified. These category criteria of research topics may have affected the findings of this study.
In the future, network analysis can be used for more advanced analysis to determine the dynamic trends of the keywords in articles and citations of key articles and concepts. Citation network analysis can help scholars observe the overall influence of the top 20 articles in academia, for instance, to determine if the top 20 articles have been widely cited within HRD or across disciplines. For a more in-depth analysis of research topics, keyword network analysis could be adopted to understand the connections and extension among keywords. The same keywords can be reviewed and identified according to topics and contexts.
For further study, this review could lead to a possible research agenda to address several important questions such as (a) What topics have been excluded over the past 10 years and need to be included in the next 10 years in HRDR? (b) What are the research trends in HRDR in terms of topics? and How are HRDR articles and topics unique compared to previous studies on HRD research trends? (c) Which HRDR articles are most frequently cited across and over diverse disciplines? and (d) Compared to other theory journals in related fields, what topics and perspectives are dominant in HRDR? How can these characteristics help HRDR elevate its position in academia and beyond HRD?
Footnotes
Declaration of conflicting interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
