This scientometric investigation analyses the comprehensive evolution of research trends, publications and citations over time, as well as keyword occurrences, top productive authors, sources and the most cited documents published on universal human values (UHV). For this study, scientometric information comprising 620 documents was extracted from the lens database, published from 1943 to 2024, using search keywords such as ‘universal human values’ or ‘universal human value’. In this study, the quantitative data analysis was conducted utilizing MS Excel (2021) and the VOSviewer (version 1.6.20) software. The findings of this investigation indicated that the publications in the field of UHV emerged in the 1940s; however, the first publication on UHV was published in 1943. The maximum number of publications (N = 101) was found in 2023, and the maximum number of citations (N = 282) was received in 1995. A total of 423 (68%) documents were published as articles. The most productive author is Anna K. Döring. Doring has published 5 documents and received 175 citations. The most fruitful source is the ‘Social Science Research Network’, and the most cited document is Diener and Diener (1995, Social Indicators Research, Vol. 36[3], 275–286). The most common and trending keywords are humans and social values, which have been used in UHV-related published documents. This investigation will be valuable for prospective researchers who want to conduct novel studies on the various dimensions of UHVs. By going through this article, independent researchers, faculty, NGO workers and policy constructors will be able to find out the most popular keywords, mostly cited authors and documents, and also the top productive sources of UHVs’ research domain.
AbdullaevaM., JalolovaS., KengboyevaM., & DavlatovaK. (2021). Universal human values as axiological values. Revista Gestão Inovação e Tecnologias, 11(2), 802–816. https://doi.org/10.47059/revistageintec.v11i2.1715
2.
AcedoF., BarrosoC., RochaC., & GalánJ. (2006). Co-authorship in management and organizational studies: An empirical and network analysis. Journal of Management Studies, 43, 957–983. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00625.x
3.
BalaidA., Abd RozanM. Z., HikmiS. N., & MemonJ. (2016). Knowledge maps: A systematic literature review and directions for future research. International Journal of Information Management, 36(3), 451–475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2016.02.005
4.
BenckendorffP., & ZehrerA. (2013). A network analysis of tourism research. Annals of Tourism Research, 43, 121–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2013.04.005
5.
BoyackK. W., KlavansR., & BörnerK. (2005). Mapping the backbone of science. Scientometrics, 64(3), 351–374. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-005-0255-6
6.
BroadusR. N. (1987). Toward a definition of ‘bibliometrics’. Scientometrics, 12(5), 373–379. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/BF02016680
7.
BusyginaT., & YuklyaevskayaA. (2022). A scientometric analysis of the literature on the topic ‘academic social networks’. Bibliosphere, 3, 101–122. https://doi.org/10.20913/1815-3186-2022-3-101-122
8.
ChaturbhujS. (2021). Scientometric analysis of scholarly publications of University of Mumbai from 2001 to 2019. https://www.academia.edu/95742346/Scientometric_Analysis_of_Scholarly_Publications_of_University_of_Mumbai_from_2001_to_2019
9.
ChengC., WangL., XieH., & YanL. (2023). Mapping digital innovation: A bibliometric analysis and systematic literature review. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 194, 122706. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122706
10.
ChoiM. J., HeoC. Y., & LawR. (2016). Developing a typology of Chinese shopping tourists: An application of the Schwartz model of universal human values. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 33(2), 141–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2014.997961
11.
CieciuchJ., DöringA. K., & HarasimczukJ. (2013). Measuring Schwartz’s values in childhood: Multidimensional scaling across instruments and cultures. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 10(5), 625–633. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2012.707779
12.
CoboM., López-HerreraA. G., Herrera-ViedmaE., & HerreraF. (2011). Science mapping software tools: Review, analysis, and cooperative study among tools. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62, 1382–1402. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21525
13.
DennisR. E., WilliamsW., GiangrecoM. F., & CloningerC. J. (1993). Quality of life as context for planning and evaluation of services for people with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 59(6), 499–512. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/001440299305900603
14.
DevikaJ. (2005). The aesthetic woman: Re-forming female bodies and minds in early twentieth-century Keralam. Modern Asian Studies, 39(2), 461–487. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0026749X04001519
15.
DienerE., & DienerC. (1995). The wealth of nations revisited: Income and quality of life. Social Indicators Research, 36(3), 275–286. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01078817
16.
DobrzańskiL. A., Dobrzańska-DanikiewiczA. D., & DobrzańskiL. B. (2021). Effect of biomedical materials in the implementation of a long and healthy life policy. Processes, 9(5), Article 5. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr9050865
17.
DöringA. K. (2010). Assessing children’s values: An exploratory study. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 28(6), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282909357151
18.
DöringA. K., BlauensteinerA., AryusK., DrögekampL., & BilskyW. (2010). Assessing values at an early age: The picture-based value survey for children (PBVS–C). Journal of Personality Assessment, 92(5), 439–448. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2010.497423
19.
FischerR., & SmithP. B. (2004). Values and organizational justice: Performance- and seniority-based allocation criteria in the United Kingdom and Germany. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35(6), 669–688. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022104270110
20.
GarfieldE. (1979). Is citation analysis a legitimate evaluation tool?Scientometrics, 1(4), 359–375. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02019306
21.
GlänzelW. (2003). Bibliometrics as a research field a course on theory and application of bibliometric indicators. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/BIBLIOMETRICS-AS-A-RESEARCH-FIELD-A-course-on-and-Gl%C3%A4nzel/4c0a6c1c7642c1eec9cbbc8423b3020b155a3c16
22.
HaboubiC., El HammoudaniY., JaradatN., JodehS., HaboubiK., HaboubiE. Dimane, & DimaneF. (2024). A bibliometric analysis of cannabis-related research from. Palestinian Medical and Pharmaceutical Journal, 9(2), 125–136. https://doi.org/10.59049/2790-0231.1132
23.
HallC. (2011). Publish and perish? Bibliometric analysis, journal ranking and the assessment of research quality in tourism. Tourism Management, 32, 16–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2010.07.001
24.
Hashem EA. R., Md SallehN. Z., AbdullahM., AliA., FaisalF., & NorR. M. (2023). Research trends, developments, and future perspectives in brand attitude: A bibliometric analysis utilizing the Scopus database (1944–2021). Heliyon, 9(1), e12765. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e12765
25.
JiaH., LiH., RongY., JiangK., LiangX., & LiG. (2024). Knowledge mapping of macrophages in osteoporosis: A bibliometric analysis (1999–2023). Orthopaedic Surgery, 16(10), 2326–2343. https://doi.org/10.1111/os.14159
26.
KoseogluM. A., RahimiR., OkumusF., & LiuJ. (2016). Bibliometric studies in tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 61, 180–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2016.10.006
27.
KostinaE., KretovaL., TeleshovaR., TsepkovaA., & VezirovT. (2015). Universal human values: Cross-cultural comparative analysis. Worldwide Trends in the Development of Education and Academic Research, 214, 1019–1028. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.696
28.
LiH., AnH., WangY., HuangJ., & GaoX. (2016). Evolutionary features of academic articles co-keyword network and keywords co-occurrence network: Based on two-mode affiliation network. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, 450, 657–669. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2016.01.017
29.
LiaoH., TangM., LuoL., LiC., ChiclanaF., & ZengX.-J. (2018). A bibliometric analysis and visualization of medical big data research. Sustainability, 10(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10010166
30.
LinnenlueckeM. K., MarroneM., & SinghA. K. (2019). Conducting systematic literature reviews and bibliometric analyses. Australian Journal of Management, 45(2), 175–194. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0312896219877678
31.
LiuJ., LiX., & WangS. (2020). What have we learnt from 10 years of fintech research? A scientometric analysis. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 155, 120022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore. 2020.120022
32.
McBurneyM. K., & NovakP. L. (2002). What is bibliometrics and why should you care?Proceedings. IEEE International Professional Communication Conference, 108–114. https://doi.org/10.1109/IPCC.2002. 1049094
33.
MerigoJ. M., Blanco-MesaF., Gil-LafuenteA., & YagerR. (2017). Thirty years of the international journal of intelligent systems: A bibliometric review. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 32, 526–554. https://doi.org/10.1002/int.21859
34.
MurnakaN. P., Suwarno, SudanaI. M., & RaharjoT. J. (2021). Educational technology research trends: A bibliometrics analysis and visualization. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 12(6), 2695–2701.
35.
NerurS., RasheedA. A., & PandeyA. (2016). Citation footprints on the sands of time: An analysis of idea migrations in strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 37(6), 1065–1084. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2377
36.
PageM. J., McKenzieJ. E., BossuytP. M., BoutronI., HoffmannT. C., MulrowC. D., ShamseerL., TetzlaffJ. M., AklE. A., BrennanS. E., ChouR., GlanvilleJ., GrimshawJ. M., HróbjartssonA., LaluM. M., LiT., LoderE. W., Mayo-WilsonE., McDonaldS., … MoherD. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
37.
PalR. K., & PalS. (2025). Scientific mapping of research evolution on artificial intelligence in education: A Scientometric analysis. https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.15613568
38.
PalS., & KumarV. (2025a). Scientific mapping of research evolution on Buddhist philosophy: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Data Science Informetrics and Citation Studies, 4, 9–19. https://doi.org/10.5530/jcitation.20250144
39.
PalS., & KumarV. (2025b). Lens database par uplabdha shaikshik akanal sambandhi anusandhanon ka granthmitiya vishleshan enam vaigyanik drishyikaran. Anweshika, 11(1), 131–147. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16896166
40.
PalS., KumarV., & KumarV. (2025). Scientific mapping of global research trends on Jain philosophy: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Data Science, Informetrics, and Citation Studies, 4(1), 78–86.
41.
PalamarJ. J., CiccaroneD., RutherfordC., KeyesK. M., CarrT. H., & CottlerL. B. (2022). Trends in seizures of powders and pills containing illicit fentanyl in the United States, 2018 through 2021. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 234, 109398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2022.109398
42.
PintoM., PulgarínA., & EscalonaM. I. (2014). Viewing information literacy concepts: A comparison of two branches of knowledge. Scientometrics, 98(3), 2311–2329. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1166-6
RaniS., Beenu, JindalH., GautamN., & KumarS. (2022). Importance of universal human values for life: A study. Asian Journal of Science and Applied Technology, 11(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.51983/ajsat-2022.11.1.3204
45.
Ronda-PupoG., & Guerras-MartínL. (2012). Dynamics of the evolution of the strategy concept 1962–2008: A co-word analysis. Strategic Management Journal, 33, 162–188. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.948
46.
RuppM., SchneckenburgerM., MerkelM., BörretR., & HarrisonD. K. (2021). Industry 4.0: A technological-oriented definition based on bibliometric analysis and literature review. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 7(1), 68. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7010068
47.
SarkarA., & GargN. (2020). ‘Peaceful workplace’ only a myth? Examining the mediating role of psychological capital on spirituality and nonviolence behaviour at the workplace. International Journal of Conflict Management, 31(5), 709–728. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCMA-11-2019-0217
48.
SchwartzS. H. (1994). Are there universal aspects in the structure and contents of human values?Journal of Social Issues, 50(4), 19–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1994.tb01196.x
49.
TanL., & DingJ. (2015). The frontier and evolution of the strategic management theory. Nankai Business Review International, 6(1), 20–41. https://doi.org/10.1108/NBRI-09-2014-0036
50.
VerplankenB., & HollandR. W. (2002). Motivated decision making: Effects of activation and self-centrality of values on choices and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(3), 434–447. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.3.434
51.
VogelR., & GüttelW. H. (2013). The dynamic capability view in strategic management: A bibliometric review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 15(4), 426–446. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12000
52.
WadaugsornK., PanrongT., WongphanP., & HarnkarnsujaritN. (2022). Plasticized hydroxypropyl cassava starch blended PBAT for improved clarity blown films: Morphology and properties. Industrial Crops and Products, 176, 114311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2021.114311
53.
WangX., XuZ., SuS.-F., & ZhouW. (2021). A comprehensive bibliometric analysis of uncertain group decision making from 1980 to 2019. Information Sciences, 547, 328–353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2020.08.036
54.
WhiteH. D., & McCainK. W. (1998). Visualizing a discipline: An author co-citation analysis of information science, 1972–1995. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(4), 327–355. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(19980401)49:4<327::AID-ASI4>3.0.CO;2-4
55.
XieL., ChenZ., WangH., ZhengC., & JiangJ. (2020). Bibliometric and visualized analysis of scientific publications on atlantoaxial spine surgery based on web of science and VOSviewer. World Neurosurgery, 137, 435–442.e4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2020.01.171
56.
YeQ., SongH., & LiT. (2012). Cross-institutional collaboration networks in tourism and hospitality research. Tourism Management Perspectives, 2–3, 55–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2012.03.002
57.
ZupicI., & ČaterT. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429–472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629
