Search results

The emotion regulation research has drawn considerable attention from academicians and scholars in the contemporary world. As a result, the publications that are specifically dedicated to emotion regulation research are rapidly escalating. Therefore, this study aims to conduct a bibliometric analysis of research articles that have been published in the field of “emotion regulation.” The study primarily examines the growth and development of scholarly publications, seminal studies, influential authors, productive journals, research production and collaboration among countries, emerging research themes, research hotspots and thematic evolution of emotion regulation research.

The Web of Science Core Collection database was used to gather the study’s data, which was then analysed using VOSviewer and Bibliometrix, Biblioshiney open-source package of the R language environment.

The study’s results reveal that the research on emotion regulation has grown significantly over the last three decades. Notably, Emotion and Frontiers in Psychology are the most dominant and productive journals in the field of emotion regulation research. The most prominent author in the area of emotion regulation is identified as James Gross, followed by Gratz, Wang and Tull. The USA is at the forefront of research on emotion regulation and has collaborated with most of the developed countries like Germany, England and Canada. The keyword analysis revealed that the most potential research areas in the field of emotion regulation are functional magnetic resonance imaging, amygdala, post-traumatic stress disorder, borderline personality disorder, alexithymia, emotion dysregulation, depression, anxiety, functional connectivity, neuroimaging, mindfulness, self-regulation, resilience and coping. The thematic evolution reflects that the research on emotion regulation has recently focused on issues including Covid-19, non-suicidal self-injury, psychological distress, intimate partner violence and mental health.

The results of this study highlighted the current knowledge gaps in emotion regulation research and suggested areas for further investigation. The present study could be useful for researchers, academicians, planners, publishers and universities engaged in emotion regulation research.

Teleworking, working from home and flexible work have gained popularity over the last few years. A shift in policies and practices in the workplace is required owing to the COVID-19 pandemic accelerating current trends in work-from-everywhere (WFE) research. This article presents a systematic literature review of WFE research from 1990 to early 2023 to understand the transformation of the field.

The Web of Science database was used to conduct this review based on rigorous bibliometric and network analysis techniques. The prominence of the research studied using SPAR-4-SLR and a collection of bibliometric techniques on selected journal articles, reviews and early access articles. Performance and keyword co-occurrence analysis form the premise of cluster analysis. The content analysis of recently published papers revealed the driving and restraining forces that help define and operationalize the concept of WFE.

The major findings indicate that the five established and accelerated trends from cluster analysis are COVID-19 and the pandemic, telework(ing), remote working, work from home and well-being and productivity. Driving and restraining forces identified through content analysis include technological breakthroughs, work–life integration challenges, inequality in the distribution of jobs, gender, shifts in industry and sector preferences, upskilling and reskilling and many more have been published post-COVID in the restraining forces category of WFE.

A key contribution of this pioneering study of “work from everywhere” is the linking of the bibliometric trends of the past three decades to the influencing and restraining factors during the pandemic. This study illustrates how WFE could be perceived differently post-COVID, which is of great concern to practitioners and future researchers.

A wide range of publications on WFE and multiple synonyms can create confusion if a systematic and effective system does not classify and associate them. This study uses both bibliometric and scientometric analyses in the context of WFE using systematic literature review (SLR) methods.