Jin Ai | Searcharxiv

arXiv2026

Constructing the Field of Philanthropic and Nonprofit Studies: Evidence from Citation Networks

Philanthropic and nonprofit studies (PNPS) has grown rapidly as an interdisciplinary field, yet its intellectual structure and boundaries remain only partially visible. This study maps the field by combining journal- and keyword-based retrieval with citation network analysis, natural language processing, and large language model-assisted cluster labeling. Using 60,917 Web of Science articles, we identify major topical communities, examine their structural connections, and assess how well mainstream PNPS journals represent the broader landscape of related scholarship. The results show that PNPS is a loosely connected field dominated by three distinct "power centers": nonprofit organizations, social movements, and voluntary action. The analysis also reveals a broader disciplinary footprint than commonly recognized, extending beyond the social sciences and humanities into areas such as biomedicine and technology. These findings clarify the organization of PNPS and highlight opportunities for stronger integration across research domains.

cs.SI↗

arXiv2025

Triadic Novelty: A Structural Typology of Science Innovation

Scientific progress depends on novelty, but current evaluation systems often conflate novelty with recognition, favoring work that aligns with existing paradigms over ideas that challenge them. We introduce a theory-driven framework that conceptualizes novelty as a structural process rather than a single scalar outcome. Drawing on network science and theories of scientific discovery, we develop a triadic typology of novelty: Pioneers introduce new topics, Mavericks recombine distant areas of knowledge, and Vanguards reinforce weak but emerging connections. We apply this framework to philanthropic and nonprofit studies, an interdisciplinary and evolving field well suited to examining how novelty is recognized before evaluation norms are fully stabilized. Results show that novelty is not uniformly rewarded: Pioneer contributions are often weakly recognized unless later taken up, Maverick contributions receive consistent recognition, and Vanguard contributions exhibit diminishing returns as ideas become established. By distinguishing how novelty enters and evolves within knowledge structures, the framework offers a citation-independent approach with implications for research evaluation, funding design, and science and innovation policy.

physics.soc-ph↗