Distinguishing emerging mainstream from bubble hype in research: Quantitative
capturing of boundary objects
Ryo Onozuka
PhD Year 3, Graduate School of Media and Governance, Keio University
2019/06/14

Summary
New concepts often emerge as combinations of two keywords. Yet, as this study will show,among thousands of such new concepts that are proposed in journals and indexed inScopus® each year, only 2.5% can survive as much as six years. This study aims at theearly detection of this small percentage of concepts, which has the potential to enter
mainstream as distinguished from bubble hype. Such information will be of significant
value to companies and research institutes who agonize about where to invest time andmoney. Thus, it is important to understand the characteristics of the combinations thathave the potential to attract researchers' interest. This study knows from boundary object
theory that a certain type of ambiguous concept has the capability to attract interest indifferent social contexts. If this study can reveal what kind of ambiguity will attract
interest, it can get to understand the underlying mechanisms of the diffusion of new
combinations of concepts. The purpose of this quantitative study is therefore to develop
a methodology to predict the emergence of new mainstream by quantifying boundary
object theory. In order to achieve this goal we analyzed 24,202 scholarly papers on
business & management topics in major journals published between 2000 and 2017. On
that basis we constructed co-occurrence networks of keywords to build a statistical model
explaining the characteristics of what it is that ties combinations to last beyond six years.
The study quantified boundary objects in three ways in order to capture the growth ofconcepts consisting of two keywords. Boundary object theory as originated by Star &Griesemer* tries to explain, by way of an example, why collaboration between experts andamateurs works well without consensus. Boundary objects are defined as an analyticalconcept on scientific objects that reside at the intersection of different social worlds. This
study takes the main characteristics of boundary objects to be ambiguity and coherence.
Ambiguity is a characteristic that permits different interpretations by members of different
social worlds, and coherence works to maintain the integrity of objects. A balance between
ambiguity and coherence enables to link researchers with different interests and promoteautonomic collaboration without their consensus. The study constructed a prediction modelthat distinguishes potential mainstream from hypes with 77.4 % accuracy. This accuracy

1permits us to claim that this method is useful to distinguish potential mainstream fromthe rest. In fact, a model shown in the result section produced a highly predictive
probability for concepts related to social media and quantitative evaluation. Both social
media and quantitative evaluation have in fact become trends. The proposed method isappropriately based on boundary objects theory and this may be suggested as the reason
why it can perform well. This method also has the potential to apply in other fields. Whileon this occasion this study constructed the method from very structured data (i.e.,academic papers), it can fundamentally be used where co-occurrence network can beconstructed.
* Star, S. L., and Griesemer, J. R. 1989. “Institutional Ecology, 'Translations' and BoundaryObjects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39,”

Social Studies of Science, (19:3), pp. 387-420.

How does it relate to CCRCʼs research themes?
This research is relevant to theme 1: “The Implications of Connectivity on Civilization,
Society, and the Self.” In my understanding, main problem in the present society isinformation overload and pile of information resulting from novel kind of connectivity ofcivilization, society and self. AI technology can be understood as solver of this problem
by finding significant patterns from it. The novel and valuable patterns emerge as
combinations of information. Thus, this research tries to understand underlying
mechanisms of the combinations that last long. While the large number of concepts, thatcombined with lots of information, are proposed every day, many of them disappeared
and few become new trend. Distinguishing emerging mainstream from bubble
hype produces important information for people, companies or research institutes
because it supports long term decisions of investment. Also, in society level, itenables us
to avoid populism that bubble hype triggers (e.g. fake news). If we can concentrate onconcepts that have persistent value, it is become easier to predict and design future
civilization through which what self, autonomy and responsibility are is changing radically.
Finding concepts that have potential to become mainstream is valuable for designingcyber civilization because, as Hacking* pointed out, concepts have capability to make up
understanding on what we are and who we are. For example, a concept “trauma,” which
was diffused after World War, changed people who are suffering from mental shocks into
“trauma patients.” It changed understanding how they recognized themselves and howsociety support them. That is, this concept changed self and society. A concept of cyber2

civilization and related concepts can have similar effects on people who live in this society
if it becomes to be used persistently and can defines who we are. This research cancontribute to predict which direction our society is going for. It can provide implication
for making better society.
* Hacking, I. (2002). HISTORICAL ONTOLOGY. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

3