Mapping Psychology Research of Türkiye in SSCI (1985–2022): A Scientometric Analysis of Growth, Collaboration, and Disciplinary Patterns

Abstract

This study focused on Türkiye-addressed psychology publications in the Social Sciences Citation Index between 1985 and 2022. Using an archival scientometric approach, the study also considered the broader institutional and disciplinary context of psychology in Türkiye. A total of 6923 publications served as the final sample to analyze the number of publications and authorship characteristics across years and journal categories. Publication concentration, collaboration partners, and citation patterns were treated as indicators of how this literature has become visible within psychology. Results revealed a general incremental trend in the number of publications across years. The highest number of publications was observed in journals categorized as multidisciplinary, clinical, and social psychology. There was an accumulation of publications such that one-fifth of all outputs appeared in only five journals. Similar accumulation patterns were observed in psychology publications worldwide. Although the total number of international collaborations increased across the years, the same trend was larger for national collaborations. The finding that more than half of the international collaborations were with Western countries was attributed to Western influence in science and psychology in Turkish academia. The incremental pattern observed in the number of citations vis-à-vis the number of publications seemed to level off by 2001. These developments were considered in relation to academic incentives. An increase in single-author publications is anticipated in the upcoming years due to current academic promotion requirements in Türkiye. The study therefore provides a descriptive basis for evaluating both research productivity and changing authorship practices. Overall, the results indicate global parallels as well as Türkiye-specific patterns in Türkiye’s psychology-related scientific output. By integrating publication output with collaboration and citation indicators, the study offers a comprehensive overview of disciplinary development. It also highlights how local academic policies may shape future publication practices.