Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (2)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = nomadic discipline

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
21 pages, 5350 KB  
Article
Digital Nomads, the New Frontier of Work in the Digital Age: A Bibliometric Analysis
by Altan Başaran
Sustainability 2025, 17(5), 1906; https://doi.org/10.3390/su17051906 - 24 Feb 2025
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 10277
Abstract
Digital nomadism is more than just a tourism idea. It represents a new working paradigm in which digital trends are transforming relationships between employers, work, and employees. Our study focuses on digital nomadism and the platforms that enable remote work relationships, which are [...] Read more.
Digital nomadism is more than just a tourism idea. It represents a new working paradigm in which digital trends are transforming relationships between employers, work, and employees. Our study focuses on digital nomadism and the platforms that enable remote work relationships, which are the result of digitalization. The present study seeks to identify the current research trends and to rationalize future research opportunities in regards to digital nomads. To this end, a bibliometric analysis of available literature from the Scopus and Web of Science databases between 2006 and 2024 will be conducted. The study uses RStudio version 2024.12.0 Build 467 and Biblioshiny as tools to perform the bibliometric analysis of the extracted data. The research findings indicate that the publication of articles demonstrated an annual growth rate of 26.31% between 2006 and 2024. The average number of citations per document is 11.19. The UK, Portugal, Spain, and the USA are the most prominent contributors to digital nomad literature. Even though the conceptual discussions of this phenomenon are carried out in different disciplines, bibliometric analysis is used in our study to observe the areas in which the subject attracts attention in the academic literature and to predict the trends for the future. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

15 pages, 308 KB  
Review
Disciplinary Fields in the Life Sciences: Evolving Divides and Anchor Concepts
by Alessandro Minelli
Philosophies 2020, 5(4), 34; https://doi.org/10.3390/philosophies5040034 - 4 Nov 2020
Cited by 6 | Viewed by 3789
Abstract
Recent and ongoing debates in biology and in the philosophy of biology reveal widespread dissatisfaction with the current definitions or circumscriptions, which are often vague or controversial, of key concepts such as the gene, individual, species, and homology, and even of whole disciplinary [...] Read more.
Recent and ongoing debates in biology and in the philosophy of biology reveal widespread dissatisfaction with the current definitions or circumscriptions, which are often vague or controversial, of key concepts such as the gene, individual, species, and homology, and even of whole disciplinary fields within the life sciences. To some extent, the long growing awareness of these conceptual issues and the contrasting views defended in their regard can be construed as a symptom of the need to revisit traditional unchallenged partitions between the specialist disciplines within the life sciences. I argue here that the current relationships between anchor disciplines (e.g., developmental biology, evolutionary biology, biology of reproduction) and nomadic concepts wandering between them is worth being explored from a reciprocal perspective, by selecting suitable anchor concepts around which disciplinary fields can flexibly move. Three examples are offered, focusing on generalized anchor concepts of generation (redefined in a way that suggests new perspectives on development and reproduction), organizational module (with a wide-ranging domain of application in comparative morphology, developmental biology, and evolutionary biology) and species as unit of representation of biological diversity (suggesting a taxonomic pluralism that must be managed with suitable adjustments of current nomenclature rules). Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Renegotiating Disciplinary Fields in the Life Sciences)
Back to TopTop