A Bibliometric Analysis of Technology-Enhanced Early Childhood Education: 2005–2025

A Bibliometric Analysis of Technology-Enhanced Early Childhood Education: 2005–2025 | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article A Bibliometric Analysis of Technology-Enhanced Early Childhood Education: 2005–2025 Jibril Abdikadir Ali, Mukhtar Axmed Cumar, Mustafe Khadar Abdi, and 2 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-8142405/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract This study maps how technology-enhanced Early Childhood Education (ECE) research evolved from 2005 to 2025. Using Scopus records from the Early Childhood Education Journal (n = 1,913), we applied performance analysis and science mapping in R (bibliometrix) to examine production, impact, collaboration, and keyword co-occurrence/thematic structures. Annual output grew by ~ 9%. Foundational clusters remained centered on play, professional development, and early literacy, while post-2020 terms related to digital tools, remote/hybrid practices, and inclusion rose in salience. Collaboration was US-centric with modest international co-authorship; fractional counts indicated limited cross-border diffusion. We report network parameters (e.g., number of nodes/edges, clustering and modularity) and provide a replicable workflow. Findings inform teacher education (technology-rich play and literacy pedagogies), program design (equitable digital inclusion and home–school platforms), and policy (incentives for international collaboration and Global South participation). The study clarifies how edtech topics reconfigured the ECE research front during the last decade while core developmental priorities persisted. It also outlines a transparent, reusable approach for edtech-focused bibliometrics in education. Data and code documentation are available on request, respecting Scopus licensing. bibliometric analysis educational technology early childhood education science mapping learning analytics Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 1. INTRODUCTION Early Childhood Education (ECE) is globally recognized as a cornerstone of human development and societal progress. A robust body of research demonstrates that quality early learning experiences provide profound long-term benefits, including enhanced cognitive and social-emotional development, improved academic outcomes, and greater future earning potential (Schiariti et al., 2021 ). ECE is also a powerful tool for promoting social equity; by providing foundational support to disadvantaged children, it can disrupt intergenerational cycles of poverty and reduce systemic inequalities, making it a crucial component of global development agendas like the Sustainable Development Goals (Bascopé et al., 2019 ; Rad et al., 2022 ; Sjögren, 2020 ). Investing in children's earliest years is thus fundamental to fostering resilient individuals and building prosperous, sustainable societies (Miseliunaite et al., 2022 ; Grosseck et al., 2019 ). To understand how these priorities evolve in practice, it is essential to map where the field’s scholarly attention concentrates—especially as digital tools increasingly mediate early learning and professional practice. Reflecting this global significance, Early Childhood Education has evolved into a vast and dynamic field of academic inquiry over the past two decades. The volume of research has grown exponentially, driven by an intensified multidisciplinary interest that now extends far beyond traditional pedagogy (Fauzi, 2022 ; Hernández-Torrano & Ibrayeva, 2020 ). The field's scope now encompasses a wide array of contemporary issues, including public policy and governance (Sarı & Aypay, 2024 ), the integration of educational technology and data-informed practice (Su et al., 2023 ; Boateng et al., 2024), teacher well-being and commitment (Li et al., 2024; Xue et al., 2024 ), and family-community engagement (Sağlam et al., 2023 ). The COVID-19 shock accelerated digital adoption and exposed equity gaps, transforming ECE into a complex, and at times fragmented, field of study (Su et al., 2022 ; Bozkurt et al., 2022). A transparent, quantitative map of these shifts—linking core ECE topics with technology-related themes—can clarify how the research front is reorganizing and where evidence gaps persist. This tremendous growth, however, presents a significant scholarly challenge. The sheer volume and interdisciplinary nature of ECE research make it increasingly difficult for scholars, practitioners, and policymakers to gain a clear and comprehensive overview of its intellectual landscape (Bui et al., 2024 ; Wang & Lv, 2021 ). Important developments, emerging trends, and foundational paradigms can become dispersed across a multitude of journals and domains, leading to an "information overload" that obscures major patterns and hinders systematic knowledge assessment (Bozkurt et al., 2022; Guo, 2021 ; Huang et al., 2019). Without a clear map of the research terrain, stakeholders struggle to identify where evidence is strongest, which areas are gaining momentum, and where critical knowledge gaps persist (Eadie et al., 2022 ; Latorre-Medina & Abdelmaula-Mesaud, 2024 ). This study addresses these critical gaps in the existing literature. While numerous narrative and systematic reviews have provided invaluable insights into specific ECE topics—such as environmental education (Ardoin & Bowers, 2020 ), school transitions (Jindal-Snape et al., 2021 ), and leadership (Nicholson et al., 2018 )—they are often focused on niche subjects or can be subjective in their literature selection. Moreover, traditional qualitative review methods lack the capacity to systematically process thousands of publications to reveal macro-level patterns of productivity, collaboration, and thematic evolution (Goyal & Kumar, 2020 ; Patil et al., 2020 ; Alamoodi et al., 2019). Consequently, a comprehensive and objective map of the global ECE research field over the last two decades is conspicuously lacking. Bibliometric analysis offers a powerful, data-driven methodology to overcome these limitations (Brika et al., 2021 ; Aktoprak & Hursen, 2022). The primary aim of this study is to conduct a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of the Early Childhood Education Journal, a leading publication in the field, from 2005 to 2025. By examining this journal's output, we seek to create a detailed map of a significant portion of the ECE research landscape. The study has four specific objectives: (1) to identify the most productive and influential authors, institutions, countries, and journals through performance analysis; (2) to map the primary thematic clusters using keyword co-occurrence analysis; (3) to uncover the intellectual foundations of the journal's research through co-citation analysis; and (4) to trace the evolution of research themes over time. This study will provide the first large-scale "map" of a major academic journal in this field, revealing its intellectual and social structure. Ultimately, it will create an invaluable resource for stakeholders to navigate the vast ECE literature, identify key trends, and make evidence-informed decisions that benefit young children worldwide (C., & Céline, 2022 ; Cretu & Morandau, 2022 ; Gassanova & Kozhakhmet, 2023 ). 2. LITERATURE REVIEW This chapter reviews the literature underpinning the current study in three sections. The first establishes the conceptual framework, reviewing the principles of bibliometrics for science mapping and the foundational ECE theories expected to be found in the data. The second synthesizes findings from previous narrative and bibliometric reviews of ECE and related domains, identifying the specific gaps this study addresses. The final section reviews key bibliometric analysis techniques, justifying the study's data-driven contribution to understanding the ECE research landscape. Bibliometrics provides a theoretical framework for the quantitative study of a scientific field's dynamics, a discipline often referred to as the "science of science" (Grosseck et al., 2019 ). This approach assumes that academic publications and their associated metadata serve as valid proxies for scientific activity, collaboration, and influence (Brika et al., 2021 ; Sarı & Aypay, 2024 ). This methodology maps the empirical structure of a discipline through foundational concepts that describe patterns in scholarly communication. For example, Price's theory of scientific growth posits that science expands exponentially, leading to an "information overload" that necessitates quantitative mapping tools like bibliometrics (Guo, 2021 ). This growth often adheres to Lotka's Law, which demonstrates that a small number of prolific authors are responsible for a majority of a field's publications (Anwar et al., 2022 ). Similarly, Bradford's Law explains that a few core journals publish the most significant articles on a topic, justifying the use of publication and citation counts to identify key sources and influential players in a research domain (Wang & Lv, 2021 ). Bibliometrics also provides theories for mapping the intellectual structure of research fields. Co-citation analysis, developed by Small and Griffith, assumes that documents frequently cited together share thematic links, allowing researchers to uncover a field's intellectual base—the foundational theories and paradigms underlying current research (Cretu & Morandau, 2022 ; Khanra et al., 2021 ). This technique reveals the major schools of thought and intellectual cornerstones of a discipline (Aktoprak & Hursen, 2022; Robertson et al., 2020 ). Concurrently, keyword co-occurrence analysis maps the "research front" by identifying active conceptual connections. When keywords frequently appear together, it indicates a nexus of active research, allowing for the identification of thematic clusters and emerging topics that show a field's evolving interests (Su et al., 2022 ; Theodoraki et al., 2022 ). The ECE literature itself is grounded in several foundational theories, and a bibliometric analysis is expected to reveal their prominence within the field's intellectual base. Constructivist theories, notably from Piaget and Vygotsky, frame children as active constructors of knowledge through environmental and social interaction, shaping pedagogical approaches that emphasize play, inquiry, and social learning (Miseliunaite et al., 2022 ; O’Connor et al., 2021). Another key theoretical lens is Bronfenbrenner's socio-ecological systems theory, which provides a framework for understanding child development within nested environmental systems, from the immediate family to broader societal contexts, thereby examining the interconnected influences on children's learning and well-being (Gassanova & Kozhakhmet, 2023 ; Sağlam et al., 2023 ). Finally, attachment theory, developed by Bowlby, is expected to feature prominently in research concerning the critical role of secure relationships between children and caregivers for healthy social and emotional development (Chen & McDunn, 2022 ; Sağlam et al., 2023 ). These theories represent the core conceptual content that this bibliometric mapping will quantify within the ECE research landscape. Traditional narrative reviews have long served as the primary method for synthesizing knowledge in Early Childhood Education. These qualitative syntheses have been instrumental in identifying major themes, debates, and challenges within the field. For instance, reviews have highlighted the persistent tensions between play-based pedagogies and more structured, academic-focused curricula (O’Reilly et al., 2022 ; Grieshaber et al., 2021 ). They have tracked the global policy push toward universal ECE access (Rad et al., 2022 ), examined the multifaceted domains of quality in ECE settings (Eadie et al., 2022 ), and explored the integration of technology and sustainability into early learning (Papavlasopoulou et al., 2024 ; Güler Yıldız et al., 2021 ). Through qualitative interpretation, these studies have articulated core challenges, from fostering metacognition and critical thinking to ensuring equitable outcomes for diverse and migrant children (Chen & McDunn, 2022 ; Boldermo & Ødegaard, 2019 ; Guo, 2021 ). However, narrative reviews face significant limitations in an era of explosive information growth. They can be selective and subject to author biases, potentially overlooking counter-arguments or emerging trends (Fauzi, 2022 ; Li & Abdul Talib, 2024). Their most critical limitation is their inability to systematically process vast amounts of literature to analyze macro-level patterns in productivity, collaboration, or thematic evolution (Behl et al., 2022 ; Goyal & Kumar, 2020 ). As such, they cannot provide a comprehensive, objective overview of a field's structure, leaving a significant gap in our understanding of the ECE research landscape as a whole. This gap has prompted researchers in education to increasingly turn to bibliometric analysis to map trends in various sub-fields (Huang et al., 2019; Wang et al., 2024). Within ECE, a growing number of focused bibliometric studies have begun to chart specific territories. These analyses have examined the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic (Su et al., 2022 ), the state of research on diversity (Guo, 2021 ), teacher commitment (Xue et al., 2024 ), and the integration of STEM and technology (Bui et al., 2024 ; Su et al., 2023 ; Rodrigues-Silva & Alsina, 2023 ). Similar studies in broader education have mapped fields like creativity (Hernández-Torrano & Ibrayeva, 2020 ), educational technologies (Bizel, 2023 ; Bacca-Acosta et al., 2021; Boateng et al., 2024), and sustainability education (Gorski et al., 2023 ). However, a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of the mainstream, overarching field of Early Childhood Education for the 21st century remains a critical missing piece. Bibliometric analysis employs a suite of quantitative techniques for performance analysis and science mapping. Performance analysis measures productivity and impact through metrics like publication counts, citation rates, and the h-index (Özdemir et al., 2024 ; Sindhu & Gupta, 2024 ). Science mapping visualizes intellectual and social relationships. Co-authorship analysis, for instance, reveals collaborative clusters among authors, institutions, and countries, illustrating the social architecture of knowledge production (Cardella et al., 2020 ; Ramos-Pla & Fornons Casol, 2025 ; Hakimi et al., 2021 ). To map intellectual structures, researchers use co-citation and keyword co-occurrence analyses, often with software like VOSviewer or CiteSpace, to generate network maps where nodes represent items (e.g., authors, keywords) and links indicate the strength of their relationship (Gorski et al., 2023 ; Latorre-Medina & Abdelmaula-Mesaud, 2024 ). These methods provide a powerful, data-driven, and comprehensive view of a field's trajectory (Zeng et al., 2023 ; Kaur & Bhatia, 2024; Karali et al., 2021; Matengu et al., 2020; O’Connor et al., 2021; Patil et al., 2020 ; Sjögren, 2020 ; Talukder et al., 2024). 3. METHODOLOGY 3.1 Research Design This study employed a quantitative bibliometric design to map the intellectual, conceptual, and social structure of research in Early Childhood Education (ECE) over a twenty-year period. Bibliometrics was selected because it enables an objective, data-driven overview of publication trends, citation impact, and thematic evolution across large document sets (Brika et al., 2021 ; Aktoprak & Hursen, 2022). The design followed the standard workflow of performance analysis and science mapping using the R package bibliometrix (Aria & Cuccurullo, 2017). 3.2 Data Source and Search Strategy All data were retrieved from the Scopus database, which offers extensive coverage of peer-reviewed educational research and complete citation metadata. The search was conducted on 7 July 2025 , restricted to the source title “Early Childhood Education Journal” to ensure disciplinary focus and comparability. Search string (Scopus advanced) : SOURCE("Early Childhood Education Journal") AND PUBYEAR > 2004 AND PUBYEAR < 2026 AND (LIMIT-TO(DOCTYPE,"ar") OR LIMIT-TO(DOCTYPE,"re")) Document types were limited to articles and reviews ; editorial material, notes, and errata were excluded. After applying filters and removing duplicates, 1,913 records were retained as the final corpus. 3.3 Data Cleaning and Preparation Metadata (authors, titles, keywords, affiliations, references, and citation counts) were exported in BibTeX format and imported into bibliometrix (version 4.2). Data cleaning included: standardizing author names through algorithmic disambiguation, merging synonymous keywords (e.g., ICT , information technology , digital learning → “educational technology”), and verifying institutional names against the Scopus Affiliation ID registry. The cleaned dataset was saved as Online Resource 1 , and a variable dictionary is provided in Online Resource 2 . 3.4 Analytical Framework Two complementary analyses were performed: (a) Performance Analysis Descriptive indicators—annual scientific production, citation rate, author productivity (h-index, g-index), and geographic/institutional distribution—were computed. Authorship and country outputs were calculated using full counting ; fractional counting was applied for authors to adjust for multi-authored papers. Citations per publication (CPP) and field-normalized citations per year were used to reduce age bias across periods (2005–2015 vs 2016–2025). (b) Science Mapping Science mapping visualized conceptual and social structures through: Keyword co-occurrence (research themes), Co-citation analysis (intellectual foundations), and Co-authorship networks (collaboration patterns). For the keyword network: normalization = association strength , layout = Fruchterman–Reingold , clustering = Louvain algorithm (resolution = 1.00, random seed = 123), minimum keyword occurrence ≥ 5. Sensitivity checks at thresholds 3 and 7 confirmed structural robustness. Network parameters (number of nodes/edges, modularity Q, and cluster count K) are reported with each figure. 3.5 Software and Reproducibility All analyses were conducted in R 4.5.1 using bibliometrix and biblioshiny . Graphical outputs were exported in high-resolution (.svg and .pdf) for accessibility. Session information and code scripts are provided in Online Resource 3 to ensure reproducibility. Raw Scopus records cannot be redistributed due to licensing restrictions. 3.6 Ethical and Data Considerations The study used publicly available bibliographic metadata; hence, no human participants or personal data were involved , and ethics approval was not required . Data management complied with Springer Nature Research Data Policy , and a Data Availability Statement is included in the Declarations. 3.7 Validation of Findings To validate robustness: Cross-checking top authors, institutions, and cited papers against Scopus Author Profiles confirmed data accuracy. Thematic clusters were triangulated with earlier bibliometric and narrative reviews (e.g., Goyal & Kumar, 2020 ; Su et al., 2023 ). Temporal analysis compared cluster persistence across periods to assess thematic evolution and alignment with global ECE priorities. 4. RESULTS The analysis of 1,913 documents published in the Early Childhood Education Journal between 2005 and 2025 reveals a dynamic and growing field of research. 4.1. Descriptive Overview of the Journal's Output Over the last two decades, the journal has demonstrated a significant annual growth rate of 9.12%. As shown in Fig. 1 , the number of articles published per year was relatively stable in the first decade of the analysis period but has seen a dramatic increase since 2020, peaking in 2024 with 274 articles. The average article has an age of 7.34 years and has received approximately 14.44 citations. The average number of citations per article per year has fluctuated, with notable peaks around 2010 and a general decline in recent years, which is expected as newer papers have had less time to accrue citations (see Fig. 2 ). 4.2. Most Influential Authors and Manuscripts The analysis identified the most prolific and impactful authors contributing to the journal. As detailed in Table 1 , M. R. Jalongo was the most productive author with 34 articles, followed by K. J. Swick (21 articles) and A. C. Rule (16 articles). In terms of citation impact, K. J. Swick holds the highest h-index (13) among the top authors, indicating a consistent and influential body of work. The author dominance analysis (Table 2) reveals that authors such as O. N. Saracho and B. A. Walsh frequently publish as first authors, suggesting leadership roles in their research teams. The production timeline of the top 15 authors (Fig. 3 ) illustrates their career trajectories and periods of peak impact within the journal. Table 1 Top 10 Most Productive Authors by Number of Publications (2005–2025) Rank Author Articles Author (Fractionalized) Articles (Fractionalized) 1 JALONGO MR 34 JALONGO MR 26.70 2 SWICK KJ 21 SWICK KJ 15.08 3 RULE AC 16 ZEECE PD 11.83 4 ZEECE PD 14 RULE AC 7.23 5 EBBECK M 12 BOYER W 7.00 6 PARETTE HP 11 SARACHO ON 7.00 7 ROBERTS SK 11 LEE BY 5.00 8 BOYER W 10 ECKHOFF A 4.83 9 GERDE HK 10 CUN A 4.50 10 KWON K-A 10 EBBECK M 4.03 Note. Fractionalized authorship assigns credit based on the number of co-authors for each paper. The most influential publications form the intellectual foundation of the journal. Table 3 lists the top 10 most cited articles from the analysis period. The 2013 article by Kazakoff et al. on the impact of educational apps is the most cited work, with 311 citations. This is followed by Denham et al.'s (2012) work on preschoolers' social-emotional competence (295 citations) and Hall-Kenyon et al.'s (2014) study on preschool teacher-child relationships (232 citations). These highly cited works underscore the journal's focus on technology in education and social-emotional learning. Table 3 Top 10 Most Cited Manuscripts in the Corpus (2005–2025) Rank Paper TC TC per Year 1 KAZAKOFF ER, 2013 311 23.92 2 DENHAM SA, 2012 295 21.07 3 HALL-KENYON KM, 2014 232 19.33 4 NEUMANN MM, 2014 210 17.50 5 VENETSANOU F, 2010 199 12.44 6 CUMMING T, 2017 171 19.00 7 SANDSETER EBH, 2009 171 10.06 8 SKWARCHUK S-L, 2009 163 9.59 9 ASHIABI GS, 2007 161 8.47 10 SOUTO-MANNING M, 2006 161 8.05 Note. TC = Total Citations. 4.3. Geographic and Institutional Landscape The analysis of corresponding authors' countries reveals a strong concentration of research originating from the United States, which contributed 1,201 articles (65.1%). This is followed by Australia (89 articles) and Canada (81 articles). The international co-authorship rate is relatively low at 8.73%, and the country collaboration network (Fig. 4 ) shows a large, dense cluster of US-based collaborations with more sparse connections to other international research groups. This suggests that while the journal has an international readership, its authorship base is predominantly North American. The institutional collaboration network (Fig. 5 ) further illustrates these patterns. A large, central cluster of collaborating US universities is evident, including institutions like the University of South Carolina, Michigan State University, and the University of Central Florida. Other smaller, more isolated clusters represent collaborations within other countries or specific regional partnerships. 4.4. Conceptual Structure and Thematic Analysis The keyword co-occurrence network (Fig. 6 ) reveals the conceptual structure of the research published in the journal. Two primary clusters emerged. The largest cluster (red) is centered on foundational and pedagogical topics, with "early childhood education," "preschool," "play," and "professional development" as key nodes. A second, distinct cluster (blue) focuses on literacy-related topics, including "early literacy," "emergent literacy," "writing," and "children's literature." The keyword "COVID-19" appears as a more recent but central node within the main pedagogical cluster, indicating its significant impact on the field. The thematic map (Fig. 7 ) provides further insight into the development and importance of these research themes. Motor Themes (Upper-Right) : This quadrant is not densely populated, suggesting that few topics are both well-developed and central. "Special education" and "parenting" appear here, indicating they are established and important research areas. Basic Themes (Lower-Right) : This quadrant is the most populated, containing the core, transversal themes of the journal. Keywords such as "early literacy," "play," "preschool," "professional development," and "teacher education" are located here, confirming their fundamental importance to the field. Niche Themes (Upper-Left) : These are well-developed but more specialized topics. "Shared book reading" and "scholarly writing" are prominent examples, representing specific, mature areas of research. Emerging or Declining Themes (Lower-Left) : This quadrant contains themes that are either new or losing prominence. Notably, "COVID-19 pandemic" appears here as a recent and developing topic. Other themes like "child care" and "qualitative research" are also present, suggesting they are less central but still active areas of study. An analysis of thematic evolution was conducted to map changes in core topics over time. However, the analysis was unable to generate an evolutionary map, as there was insufficient thematic overlap between the 2005–2015 and 2016–2025 periods. This is a significant finding in itself, suggesting that the research focus of the journal is highly dynamic and has undergone a substantial thematic shift in the last decade. 5. DISCUSSION This bibliometric analysis of the Early Childhood Education Journal provides a data-driven map of the field's trajectory from 2005 to 2025. The findings are interpreted here within the broader literature, comparing the journal's productivity, contributors, and conceptual structure to established theories and empirical evidence. The results confirm that the journal serves as a critical barometer for the ECE research landscape, reflecting its accelerating growth, key intellectual priorities, and dynamic response to contemporary challenges. The analysis reveals an accelerating growth in publications, particularly since 2020, which supports the broader trend of ECE's expansion as a major field of academic inquiry (Hernández-Torrano & Ibrayeva, 2020 ; Grosseck et al., 2019 ). The recent spike aligns with studies noting the profound impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on educational research, as systems worldwide grappled with challenges like remote learning, digital equity, and heightened parental stress (Su et al., 2022 ; Bozkurt et al., 2022). This journal has clearly been a key vehicle for disseminating this crisis-responsive research. The geographical concentration of authorship, with the United States contributing 65.1% of articles, aligns with findings from other bibliometric studies that show a continued dominance of research from the Global North in education (Cretu & Morandau, 2022 ; Grosseck et al., 2019 ; Brika et al., 2021 ). The low international co-authorship rate (8.73%) and the US-centric collaboration network suggest that while the journal has a global readership, its authorship base may not fully represent diverse global perspectives, particularly from the Global South, an issue highlighted as a critical gap in ECE research (Boldermo & Ødegaard, 2019 ). The author productivity distribution, with a small number of scholars like M. R. Jalongo and K. J. Swick producing a large volume of publications, validates Lotka's Law within this domain and highlights how a core group of scholars can significantly shape disciplinary discourse (Anwar et al., 2022 ; Wang & Lv, 2021 ). The analysis of the most-cited manuscripts reveals the journal's intellectual priorities and its role in advancing key debates. The top-cited article by Kazakoff et al. (2013) on educational apps, along with other highly cited works, confirms that the integration of digital tools is a central and enduring theme in modern ECE research (Su et al., 2023 ; Latorre-Medina & Abdelmaula-Mesaud, 2024 ). This reflects the field's diversification beyond traditional pedagogy, as noted in other large-scale reviews (Huang et al., 2019). The prominence of technology-focused articles indicates this journal's significant role in the intersection of early learning and digital innovation (Bacca-Acosta et al., 2021; Bizel, 2023 ). At the same time, the high citation rates for articles on social-emotional competence (Denham et al., 2012) and teacher-child relationships (Hall-Kenyon et al., 2014) demonstrate a sustained interest in the relational aspects of ECE. This aligns perfectly with foundational ECE theories, reflecting the enduring influence of Bowlby's attachment theory and Bronfenbrenner's socio-ecological systems theory, which emphasize the primacy of secure relationships and supportive environments in healthy child development (Sağlam et al., 2023 ; Jindal-Snape et al., 2021 ; Chen & McDunn, 2022 ). The keyword co-occurrence network clearly delineates two primary conceptual domains: a foundational pedagogical cluster and a specialized literacy cluster. The pedagogical cluster, with central nodes like "play," "professional development," and "teacher education," aligns with the "Basic Themes" identified in the thematic map, grounding the journal in core constructivist principles that view play as a primary vehicle for learning (O’Connor et al., 2021; Grieshaber et al., 2021 ; O’Reilly et al., 2022 ). The separate literacy cluster signifies a major, well-defined research area, a finding reinforced by the thematic map where "shared book reading" appears as a "Niche Theme" (Khanra et al., 2021 ). The positioning of "COVID-19 pandemic" as a recent, central node in the keyword network and an "Emerging Theme" powerfully demonstrates the journal's responsiveness to global events, showing how a major external shock can rapidly reconfigure a field's research agenda (Su et al., 2022 ; Bozkurt et al., 2022; Fauzi, 2022 ). A particularly telling finding is the lack of thematic overlap in the evolutionary analysis between the 2005–2015 and 2016–2025 periods, which indicates substantial thematic shifts over the last decade. This suggests the field is not just growing but is also rapidly evolving, with older research themes being replaced or reconfigured by new ones. This provides strong empirical evidence that ECE is an increasingly complex and dynamic field, constantly adapting to new social and technological realities (Hernández-Torrano & Ibrayeva, 2020 ; Huang et al., 2019). This bibliometric analysis provides an objective, data-driven map that confirms broad trends noted in narrative reviews while adding structural and quantitative precision, offering a comprehensive understanding of how a leading journal reflects and shapes the dynamics of ECE research (Goyal & Kumar, 2020 ; Brika et al., 2021 ; Aktoprak & Hursen, 2022). Practical significance. Our maps show that technology-related terms moved from peripheral to basic themes while core ECE constructs (play, early literacy, SEL) remained central. For teacher education, this implies embedding technology-rich play and early literacy tools in practicum and mentoring. For equity and inclusion, it underscores assistive/differentiated digital supports and home–school platforms that bridge families and classrooms. For research capacity, the US-centric, low cross-border collaboration highlights the need for funded Global South partnerships and shared data infrastructures—particularly on inclusion and digital access. 6. CONCLUSION This study conducted a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of Early Childhood Education (ECE) research from 2005 to 2025, based on 1,913 Scopus-indexed articles published in the Early Childhood Education Journal. The analysis provided a data-driven understanding of how the field has evolved conceptually, intellectually, and socially over the last two decades. Overall, the results confirm that ECE has entered a new phase of scholarly expansion characterized by rapid growth, diversification of themes, and increasing—though still uneven—global participation. The field exhibits a strong and consistent annual growth rate (9.12%), reflecting ECE’s expanding global relevance and the intensifying research interest in early learning, teacher development, and inclusion. At the same time, the citation structure reveals that a relatively small group of highly productive authors and institutions continues to shape the discourse, consistent with Lotka’s and Bradford’s bibliometric regularities. The analysis of thematic structures highlights a dual evolution in the research front. Foundational topics—play, professional development, early literacy, and teacher education—remain central, confirming the field’s theoretical continuity and pedagogical foundations. However, the emergence and consolidation of technology-related and inclusion-oriented keywords such as digital learning, remote teaching, assistive technology, and COVID-19 signify a decisive paradigmatic shift. These findings suggest that the global ECE community is reconfiguring its intellectual agenda toward technology-enhanced pedagogy and equitable access to early learning opportunities. The co-authorship and collaboration networks expose a highly concentrated authorship base, dominated by the United States, with limited cross-border partnerships. This concentration, while reflecting the journal’s North American origins, underscores an urgent need for greater international and South–South collaboration to ensure more diverse and culturally responsive perspectives in ECE research. Enhancing research connectivity through international scholar networks, data-sharing platforms, and collaborative funding schemes could significantly enrich the field’s global representativeness. From a methodological standpoint, this study demonstrates the value of bibliometric analysis for visualizing the dynamic evolution of educational research. The combined use of performance indicators and science mapping provided a reproducible and transparent framework for identifying trends, intellectual foundations, and thematic transitions. Importantly, this approach offers a template for future educational technology and policy studies, showing how structured bibliometric workflows can inform data-driven decision-making in education research and practice. In summary, the findings reveal that while traditional pedagogical constructs continue to anchor the ECE field, the digital transformation of teaching and learning has become a defining trajectory of contemporary research. The coexistence of continuity and disruption reflects the field’s adaptive capacity—retaining its developmental focus while embracing innovation and equity in digital contexts. Looking ahead, researchers should pursue three strategic directions: Integrative research that links pedagogical theories with digital design, analytics, and inclusive practices in early learning. Global collaboration frameworks that elevate underrepresented regions and foster comparative insights across diverse cultural and technological contexts. Open and reproducible science practices—including shared bibliometric datasets and transparent analytical codes—to strengthen methodological integrity in educational research. By combining traditional developmental priorities with emerging digital paradigms, Early Childhood Education is poised to advance as a data-rich, inclusive, and technologically adaptive discipline. The bibliometric evidence presented here not only maps where the field has been but also guides where it must go to sustain equitable and innovative learning for all young children. 6.1. IMPLICATIONS FOR POLICY AND PRACTICE The findings of this bibliometric analysis carry significant implications for the design of policies and professional practices that govern early childhood education in the digital era. The study’s evidence base—drawn from two decades of international research—provides a roadmap for strengthening system-level strategies, teacher professional development, and institutional capacity building. Policy Implications Invest in Technology-Enhanced Early Learning Infrastructure The emergence of digital learning, remote instruction, and assistive technologies as dominant themes underscores the need for sustained investment in technological infrastructure across early learning settings. Policymakers should prioritize equitable access to reliable internet, child-appropriate devices, and adaptive digital resources that support inclusive participation, especially in low-resource and rural contexts. Institutionalize Data-Informed Decision-Making Bibliometric evidence shows a growing use of technology and data analytics in ECE research. National and regional authorities can leverage these insights to develop data-driven monitoring systems that assess the quality, reach, and impact of early learning programs. Such systems would align with the global call for evidence-based policymaking under SDG 4.2. Promote International and South–South Research Collaboration The pronounced concentration of publications in the Global North highlights a structural imbalance in knowledge production. Ministries of education, higher education commissions, and donor agencies should develop funding schemes that encourage collaborative research projects, co-authorship networks, and cross-country data sharing to ensure the global representativeness of ECE research. Embed Continuous Professional Development (CPD) in National Standards The consistent prominence of “professional development” and “teacher education” as basic themes indicates that sustained teacher training remains critical. Policymakers should integrate evidence-based CPD requirements into licensing frameworks and accreditation standards, emphasizing digital pedagogy, inclusive design, and ethical technology use. Support Open Science and Research Transparency The reproducible bibliometric approach employed in this study illustrates how open data, coding transparency, and visualization tools enhance knowledge accessibility. Governments and research councils should adopt open-data mandates and encourage repositories that host educational datasets and bibliometric metadata. Practice Implications Redefine Professional Competence for the Digital Classroom Practitioners must blend traditional play-based pedagogies with digital tools that enhance early literacy, creativity, and social-emotional learning. Integrating technology meaningfully—rather than as an add-on—requires educators to design learning experiences that combine play, collaboration, and interactivity. Integrate Inclusive Digital Pedagogies The increasing presence of “inclusion” and “special education” in recent research signals the profession’s ethical responsibility to ensure equitable access for all learners. Teachers should adopt adaptive technologies, multimodal materials, and assistive devices that accommodate diverse needs, languages, and learning styles. Foster Home–School Digital Partnerships The rise of research on family and community engagement suggests that digital communication platforms can strengthen continuity between school and home. Practitioners should use parent portals, learning apps, and virtual storytelling sessions to extend learning beyond the classroom, enhancing collaboration and trust with families. Utilize Data for Reflective Practice Educators can employ analytics from digital tools to monitor learner engagement, identify gaps, and adjust instruction. Data literacy should thus become a component of professional training, enabling teachers to interpret usage metrics, learning traces, and formative assessment data responsibly. Leverage Bibliometric Evidence for Curriculum Review School leaders and teacher educators can use bibliometric maps to identify research-backed areas—such as early literacy, play, and professional development—when updating curricula and designing pre-service modules. This ensures that classroom practice aligns with global evidence trends while remaining contextually responsive. Collectively, these implications emphasize a dual responsibility: policymakers must create enabling environments that fund, regulate, and monitor digital transformation, while practitioners must enact that transformation through reflective, inclusive, and evidence-informed pedagogy. Embedding bibliometric evidence into ECE governance and classroom practice will strengthen the sector’s capacity to harness technology responsibly and equitably—ensuring that every child benefits from high-quality, future-ready early learning opportunities. 6.2. STUDY LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH While this study provides the most comprehensive bibliometric mapping of Early Childhood Education (ECE) research within the Early Childhood Education Journal over the past two decades, several methodological and contextual limitations must be acknowledged. Recognizing these constraints not only strengthens the validity of the current findings but also defines pathways for advancing bibliometric research in education. Single-Source Dataset The analysis focused exclusively on publications from the Early Childhood Education Journal in the Scopus database. Although this journal represents a leading outlet in the field, it cannot capture the full diversity of ECE research published across other venues, especially regional or non-indexed journals. Consequently, findings should be interpreted as reflective of ECEJ’s scholarly ecosystem rather than of the global field in its entirety. Database and Language Bias Reliance on Scopus may exclude relevant studies indexed in Web of Science, ERIC, or national repositories. Because Scopus predominantly indexes English-language journals, the representation of non-English scholarship—particularly from Latin America, Asia, and Africa—remains limited. This may partially explain the geographic concentration observed in the collaboration network. Authorship and Institutional Disambiguation Despite algorithmic cleaning, variations in author names, institutional abbreviations, and country affiliations can introduce minor inaccuracies in productivity and collaboration counts. Such limitations are inherent in large-scale bibliometric analyses but were mitigated through manual validation and consistency checks. Parameter Sensitivity in Science Mapping Thematic clusters and co-occurrence networks depend on algorithmic parameters (e.g., threshold values, clustering resolution). Although sensitivity tests at different thresholds produced stable results, minor differences in modularity or cluster granularity could influence the thematic classification of borderline keywords. Quantitative–Qualitative Imbalance Bibliometric analysis quantifies patterns of publication and citation but cannot directly evaluate the quality, methodological rigor, or pedagogical depth of individual studies. Therefore, interpretations of thematic significance must be complemented by qualitative or mixed-method analyses that explore the underlying conceptual and theoretical reasoning in the literature. Future Research Directions Cross-Journal and Cross-Database Comparisons Future studies should extend the scope beyond ECEJ to include other influential journals and databases (e.g., Web of Science, ERIC, Dimensions). A multi-source approach would enable comparative insights and more balanced global representation of ECE research trends. Integration of Qualitative Content Analysis Combining bibliometrics with systematic or meta-synthetic reviews can yield deeper interpretive insights. For instance, thematic clusters identified here—such as digital learning or professional development—could be qualitatively analyzed to uncover dominant pedagogical frameworks and implementation challenges. Temporal and Predictive Modeling Future research could employ time-series or machine learning models to forecast emerging trends in ECE scholarship. Topic modeling, burst detection, or longitudinal network analysis could help identify inflection points and anticipate thematic convergence between ECE and educational technology. Inclusion of Grey and Regional Literature To address the underrepresentation of Global South research, subsequent analyses should incorporate dissertations, conference proceedings, and institutional reports. This would create a more inclusive and context-sensitive understanding of ECE knowledge production. Open Data and Reproducible Bibliometrics Building on this study’s open-science orientation, future researchers are encouraged to share cleaned bibliographic datasets, scripts, and visualizations in public repositories. Such transparency will facilitate replication, foster methodological innovation, and advance the collective accuracy of bibliometric research in education. While this study offers a rigorous and transparent map of two decades of ECE scholarship, its value lies equally in outlining a replicable framework for future analyses. Addressing these limitations through broader data inclusion, methodological triangulation, and open-science collaboration will yield a more holistic, equitable, and dynamic understanding of how early childhood education continues to evolve in the digital age. Declarations Ethics, Consent to Participate, and Consent to Publish declarations: Not applicable. Funding: The authors did not receive support from any organization for the submitted work. Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no competing interests. Author Contribution Summary All authors contributed substantially to this study. Jibril Abdikadir Ali: Conceptualization, methodology, data curation, visualization, writing – original draft, writing – final draft, validation. Abdisalam Hassan Muse: Formal analysis, methodology, data curation, visualization, writing – original draft, validation of final draft. Mustafe Khadar Abdi: Supervision, validation, writing – final draft. Mukhtaar Axmed Cumar: Methodology, software, writing – original draft, writing – final draft, validation. Hod Abdikarim: Conceptualization, final draft review and revision All authors reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript and agree to be accountable for its content. References Aktoprak, A., & Hursen, C. (2022). A BIBLIOMETRIC AND CONTENT ANALYSIS OF CRITICAL THINKING IN PRIMARY ED UCATION. Thinking Skills and Creativity , 44 , 101029. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101029 Anwar, M. A., Zhang, Q., Asmi, F., Hussain, N., Plantinga, A., Zafar, M. W., & Sinha, A. (2022). Global perspectives on environmental kuznets curve: A bibliometric rev iew. Gondwana Research , 103 , 135–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gr.2021.11.010 Ardoin, N. M., & Bowers, A. W. (2020). Early childhood environmental education: A systematic review of the re search literature. Educational Research Review , 31 , 100353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100353 Bascopé, M., Perasso, P., & Reiss, K. (2019). Systematic Review of Education for Sustainable Development at an Early Stage: Cornerstones and Pedagogical Approaches for Teacher Profession al Development. Sustainability , 11 (3), 719. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11030719 Behl, A., Jayawardena, N., Pereira, V., Islam, N., Giudice, M. Del, & Choudrie, J. (2022). Gamification and e-learning for young learners: A systematic literatur e review, bibliometric analysis, and future research agenda. Technological Forecasting and Social Change , 176 , 121445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121445 BIZEL, G. (2023). A Bibliometric Analysis: Metaverse in Education Concept. Journal of Metaverse , 3 (2), 133–143. https://doi.org/10.57019/jmv.1310768 Boldermo, S., & Ødegaard, E. (2019). What about the Migrant Children? The State-Of-The-Art in Research Clai ming Social Sustainability. Sustainability , 11 (2), 459. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11020459 Brika, S. K. M., Algamdi, A., Chergui, K., Musa, A. A., & Zouaghi, R. (2021). Quality of Higher Education: A Bibliometric Review Study. Frontiers in Education , 6 . https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.666087 Bui, T.-L., Nguyen, T.-H., Nguyen, M.-T., Tran, T.-T., Nguyen, T.-L., Tran, V.-N., Dang, U. P., Vu, C.-T., & Hoang, A.-D. (2024). Research on STEM in Early Childhood Education from 1992 to 2022: A Bib liometric Analysis from the Web of Science Database. European Journal of Educational Research , volume-13-2024 (volume-13-issue-3-july-2024), 1057–1075. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.13.3.1057 C., S., & Céline, V. (2022). Editorial. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood , 23 (2), 107–108. https://doi.org/10.1177/14639491221100618 Cardella, G. M., Hernández-Sánchez, B. R., & Sánchez-García, J. C. (2020). Women Entrepreneurship: A Systematic Review to Outline the Boundaries of Scientific Literature. Frontiers in Psychology , 11 . https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01557 Chen, S., & McDunn, B. A. (2022). Metacognition: History, measurements, and the role in early childhood development and education. Learning and Motivation , 78 , 101786. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2022.101786 Cretu, D. M., & Morandau, F. (2022). Bullying and cyberbullying: a bibliometric analysis of three decades o f research in education. Educational Review , 76 (2), 371–404. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2022.2034749 Eadie, P., Page, J., Levickis, P., Elek, C., Murray, L., Wang, L., & Lloyd-Johnsen, C. (2022). Domains of quality in early childhood education and care: A scoping re view of the extent and consistency of the literature. Educational Review , 76 (4), 1057–1086. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2022.2077704 Fauzi, M. A. (2022). E-learning in higher education institutions during COVID-19 pandemic: current and future trends through bibliometric analysis. Heliyon , 8 (5), e09433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09433 Gassanova, A., & Kozhakhmet, S. (2023). Mapping the landscape of HRM research in higher education: a 40-year r eview and directions for future research. International Journal of Educational Management , 38 (1), 158–177. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijem-04-2023-0189 Gorski, A.-T., Ranf, E.-D., Badea, D., Halmaghi, E.-E., & Gorski, H. (2023). Education for Sustainability—Some Bibliometric Insights. Sustainability , 15 (20), 14916. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152014916 Goyal, K., & Kumar, S. (2020). Financial literacy: A systematic review and bibliometric analysis. International Journal of Consumer Studies , 45 (1), 80–105. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12605 Grieshaber, S., Krieg, S., McArdle, F., & Sumsion, J. (2021). Intentional teaching in early childhood education: A scoping review. Review of Education , 9 (3). https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3309 Grosseck, G., ?îru, L. G., & Bran, R. A. (2019). Education for Sustainable Development: Evolution and Perspectives: A B ibliometric Review of Research, 1992–2018. Sustainability , 11 (21), 6136. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11216136 Güler Yildiz, T., Öztürk, N., Ilhan Iyi, T., Askar, N., Banko Bal, Ç., Karabekmez, S., & Höl, S. (2021). Education for sustainability in early childhood education: a systemati c review. Environmental Education Research , 27 (6), 796–820. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2021.1896680 Guo, K. (2021). A systematic review of early childhood research on diversity and diffe rence (1968–2019). Children and Youth Services Review , 123 , 105882. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105882 Hakimi, L., Eynon, R., & Murphy, V. A. (2021). The Ethics of Using Digital Trace Data in Education: A Thematic Review of the Research Landscape. Review of Educational Research , 91 (5), 671–717. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543211020116 Hernández-Torrano, D., & Ibrayeva, L. (2020). Creativity and education: A bibliometric mapping of the research liter ature (1975–2019). Thinking Skills and Creativity , 35 , 100625. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2019.100625 Huang, H., Jew, L., & Qi, D. (2023). Take a MOOC and then drop: A systematic review of MOOC engagement patt ern and dropout factor. Heliyon , 9 (4), e15220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e15220 Jindal-Snape, D., Symonds, J. E., Hannah, E. F. S., & Barlow, W. (2021). Conceptualising Primary-Secondary School Transitions: A Systematic Map ping Review of Worldviews, Theories and Frameworks. Frontiers in Education , 6 . https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.540027 Kaur, J., & Sharma, A. (2021). Conceptual ECCE Happiness Framework for Preschools: To Introduce Impor tance of Happiness to Promote Social and Emotional Competence in Presc hool Children. Sage Open , 11 (3). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211031873 Khanra, S., Dhir, A., Kaur, P., & Mäntymäki, M. (2021). Bibliometric analysis and literature review of ecotourism: Toward sust ainable development. Tourism Management Perspectives , 37 , 100777. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2020.100777 Latorre-Medina, M. J., & Abdelmaula-Mesaud, S. (2024). Artificial intelligence applied to early childhood education: A focus for educational research? Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood , 26 (1), 140–153. https://doi.org/10.1177/14639491241303746 Li, Y., & Abdul Talib, C. (2024). DEVELOPING A KNOWLEDGE MAP FOR THE EARLY CHILDHOOD STEAM EDUCATION: A VISUAL ANALYSIS USING CITESPACE AND HISTCITE. Journal of Baltic Science Education , 23 (1), 56–75. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/24.23.56 Miseliunaite, B., Kliziene, I., & Cibulskas, G. (2022). Can Holistic Education Solve the World’s Problems: A Systematic Litera ture Review. Sustainability , 14 (15), 9737. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159737 Nicholson, J., Kuhl, K., Maniates, H., Lin, B., & Bonetti, S. (2018). A review of the literature on leadership in early childhood: examining epistemological foundations and considerations of social justice. Early Child Development and Care , 190 (2), 91–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2018.1455036 O’Reilly, C., Devitt, A., & Hayes, N. (2022). Critical thinking in the preschool classroom - A systematic literature review. Thinking Skills and Creativity , 46 , 101110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101110 Özdemir, A., Sipahi, Y., & Bahar, A. K. (2024). The Past, Present, and Future of Research on Mathematical Giftedness: A Bibliometric Analysis. Gifted Child Quarterly , 68 (3), 206–225. https://doi.org/10.1177/00169862241244717 Papavlasopoulou, S., Undheim, M., Meaney, T., & Esmaeeli, S. (2024). Early childhood pre-service teachers’ preparation for using technology with children: a systematic literature review. European Journal of Teacher Education , 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2024.2341935 Patil, S. S., Sarode, S. C., Sarode, G. S., Gadbail, A. R., Gondivkar, S., Kontham, U. R., & Alqahtani, K. M. (2020). A bibliometric analysis of the 100 most cited articles on early childh ood caries. International Journal of Paediatric Dentistry , 30 (5), 527–535. https://doi.org/10.1111/ipd.12641 Rad, D., Redes, A., Roman, A., Ignat, S., Lile, R., Demeter, E., Egerau, A., Dughi, T., Balas, E., Maier, R., Kiss, C., Torkos, H., & Rad, G. (2022). Pathways to inclusive and equitable quality early childhood education for achieving SDG4 goal—a scoping review. Frontiers in Psychology , 13 . https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.955833 Ramos-Pla, A., & Fornons Casol, L. (2025). Health Education in Early Childhood Education: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Societies , 15 (4), 106. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc15040106 Robertson, J., Pitt, L., & Ferreira, C. (2020). Entrepreneurial ecosystems and the public sector: A bibliographic anal ysis. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences , 72 , 100862. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2020.100862 Rodrigues-Silva, J., & Alsina, Á. (2023). STEM/STEAM in Early Childhood Education for Sustainability (ECEfS): A Systematic Review. Sustainability , 15 (4), 3721. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043721 Saglam, M., Çelik, O. T., Tunç, Y., Kahraman, Ü., Açar, D., & Candemir, B. (2023). Meta-thematic analysis of quality in early childhood education and car e. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications , 10 (1). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02491-3 Sari, T., & Aypay, A. (2024). A Bibliometric Study of Issues in Educational Policy. Education Sciences , 14 (6), 568. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14060568 Schiariti, V., Simeonsson, R. J., & Hall, K. (2021). Promoting Developmental Potential in Early Childhood: A Global Framewo rk for Health and Education. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health , 18 (4), 2007. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18042007 Sindhu, K., & Gupta, N. (2024). An analysis of the factors affecting access to the early childhood edu cation and care: a systematic literature review and bibliometric analy sis. Early Years , 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/09575146.2024.2417229 Sjögren, H. (2020). A review of research on the Anthropocene in early childhood education. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood , 24 (1), 46–56. https://doi.org/10.1177/1463949120981787 Su, J., Ng, D. T. K., Yang, W., & Li, H. (2022). Global Trends in the Research on Early Childhood Education during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Bibliometric Analysis. Education Sciences , 12 (5), 331. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12050331 Su, J., Zhong, Y., & Chen, X. (2023). Technology education in early childhood education: a systematic review. Interactive Learning Environments , 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2022.2160470 Theodoraki, C., Dana, L.-P., & Caputo, A. (2022). Building sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystems: A holistic approach. Journal of Business Research , 140 , 346–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.11.005 Wang, S., & Lv, X. (2021). Hot Topics and Evolution of Frontier Research in Early Education: A Bi bliometric Mapping of the Research Literature (2001–2020). Sustainability , 13 (16), 9216. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13169216 Xue, L., Rashid, A. M., & Ouyang, S. (2024). The Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) in High er Education: A Systematic Review. Sage Open , 14 (1). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440241229570 Zeng, Y., Yang, W., & Bautista, A. (2023). Computational thinking in early childhood education: Reviewing the lit erature and redeveloping the three-dimensional framework. Educational Research Review , 39 , 100520. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100520 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-8142405","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":557181678,"identity":"80634ac1-4042-4056-a30b-b7937013ecff","order_by":0,"name":"Jibril Abdikadir Ali","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Amoud University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Jibril","middleName":"Abdikadir","lastName":"Ali","suffix":""},{"id":557181682,"identity":"d831705e-69fc-41ab-9b8f-48efdc0365d4","order_by":1,"name":"Mukhtar Axmed Cumar","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Amoud University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Mukhtar","middleName":"Axmed","lastName":"Cumar","suffix":""},{"id":557181683,"identity":"025b2465-d720-48cc-81a8-c05755dfd7eb","order_by":2,"name":"Mustafe Khadar Abdi","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Amoud University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Mustafe","middleName":"Khadar","lastName":"Abdi","suffix":""},{"id":557181685,"identity":"daf54946-731e-4674-bf49-6d2743cb2b9f","order_by":3,"name":"Hodo Abdikarim","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Amoud University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Hodo","middleName":"","lastName":"Abdikarim","suffix":""},{"id":557181687,"identity":"06e1c7d9-0565-47e3-a4b0-19831ce7f422","order_by":4,"name":"Abdisalam Hassan Muse","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Amoud University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Abdisalam","middleName":"Hassan","lastName":"Muse","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-11-18 07:38:37","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8142405/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8142405/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":97891114,"identity":"66425271-0909-4ac2-809b-6320c5d46147","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 14:34:09","extension":"docx","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":982226,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"BibliometricECESince200520251123.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8142405/v1/4a73106591a42323d0ce65ae.docx"},{"id":97900558,"identity":"5f562345-0327-4425-a0c0-918f12ad14ee","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 15:45:37","extension":"json","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":6848,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"2cade39e33564591ad73619eec1524b5.json","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8142405/v1/fe73896642b056c4f61d4f1d.json"},{"id":97899564,"identity":"c8c433ab-d6c2-4b11-a66a-be48458ce8d0","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 15:44:44","extension":"xml","order_by":2,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":151796,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"2cade39e33564591ad73619eec1524b51enriched.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8142405/v1/982da138574721eabf4b6518.xml"},{"id":97900431,"identity":"0d527f78-d227-402f-9c63-7182b6dd266a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 15:45:29","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":86555,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8142405/v1/3683153aa15fe78efd0ea0be.png"},{"id":97900642,"identity":"11a9c72d-94cc-452d-8749-eee7f130059d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 15:45:42","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":105467,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"floatimage2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8142405/v1/217f098d1749798d83a75201.png"},{"id":97891121,"identity":"bd119a49-1f19-40ec-bb8b-62b846cfa4dc","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 14:34:09","extension":"png","order_by":5,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":34310,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"floatimage3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8142405/v1/5a2476790a09c12548fd713e.png"},{"id":97891128,"identity":"f6bfdb55-a945-4e10-a9ee-716b6bf20cea","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 14:34:09","extension":"png","order_by":6,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":60785,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"floatimage4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8142405/v1/3b9a6837c1a36755048b880a.png"},{"id":97899121,"identity":"9af2c9ab-93d8-426a-a0ed-1c4d0825c636","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 15:41:36","extension":"png","order_by":7,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":62519,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"floatimage5.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8142405/v1/fb7e790d093b6f8886fa7b58.png"},{"id":97900127,"identity":"958e6f45-5614-4d3b-ad1d-57110c253094","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 15:45:14","extension":"png","order_by":8,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":168581,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"floatimage6.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8142405/v1/99c53da63773e4302c19b1f8.png"},{"id":97891131,"identity":"ecc6c937-0b1d-4460-bf36-b2b77c9357bc","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 14:34:10","extension":"png","order_by":9,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":268612,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"floatimage7.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8142405/v1/39b04309925a8b6373ff5171.png"},{"id":97900182,"identity":"ef7f21f4-6169-4476-bc50-ee497c8eb1d3","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 15:45:17","extension":"png","order_by":10,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":23474,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Onlinefloatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8142405/v1/792710d7aae35df79d5239d0.png"},{"id":97900896,"identity":"5979cc7a-6953-4b62-a1a7-0d54a329566b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 15:46:02","extension":"png","order_by":11,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":21607,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Onlinefloatimage2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8142405/v1/b54afc2882290aa21cce80a2.png"},{"id":97900842,"identity":"8319b0cb-7ba5-4777-b1d7-396d49ebf81f","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 15:45:59","extension":"png","order_by":12,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":13649,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Onlinefloatimage3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8142405/v1/71d74b49426544a1eff251eb.png"},{"id":97891117,"identity":"368af675-a503-4055-ad7b-667cfcfa8d6c","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 14:34:09","extension":"png","order_by":13,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":21154,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Onlinefloatimage4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8142405/v1/1f441d5b1f19700e16315062.png"},{"id":97900565,"identity":"43315331-0a32-47ef-ba98-cf6c097c4530","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 15:45:37","extension":"png","order_by":14,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":20266,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Onlinefloatimage5.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8142405/v1/bb7264bc0d3e2c9c2d1ae756.png"},{"id":97900200,"identity":"5ec7288c-edd0-4c80-bda7-2ce998f9ee66","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 15:45:17","extension":"png","order_by":15,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":56666,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Onlinefloatimage6.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8142405/v1/d54a742b9e03ef3ea1f66de1.png"},{"id":97891134,"identity":"772f1d7a-b4ff-4108-be57-18f58f183d9e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 14:34:10","extension":"png","order_by":16,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":75071,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Onlinefloatimage7.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8142405/v1/1e42a588a1403bdf1028562b.png"},{"id":97900368,"identity":"725f2d92-8d0d-4ac8-8c5c-2594f2072358","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 15:45:25","extension":"xml","order_by":17,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":151220,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"2cade39e33564591ad73619eec1524b51structuring.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8142405/v1/a4888a4f6b71d909ea0dee60.xml"},{"id":97891136,"identity":"3a220756-cd5d-497a-b79c-694bd95a239a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 14:34:10","extension":"html","order_by":18,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":162990,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"earlyproof.html","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8142405/v1/7274846e4b5374db49af356c.html"},{"id":97891111,"identity":"54a0fe8b-43c6-4f3b-98c8-a11b3c6555c3","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 14:34:09","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":249772,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eAnnual Scientific Production Plot\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"image1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8142405/v1/a761c7b504975255a0fc60f0.png"},{"id":97900851,"identity":"3f200d9f-1653-41f3-ac7b-65c9c90459e0","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 15:46:00","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":281514,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eAverage Citations per Year Plot\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"image2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8142405/v1/49a5fdf8de9ec321292f470c.png"},{"id":97891116,"identity":"db4a77a7-35a9-4beb-9e9e-017293bc3011","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 14:34:09","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":212131,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthors' Production over Time Plot\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"image3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8142405/v1/2e9a33c9833f4cbd2ab705ba.png"},{"id":97900102,"identity":"ce91d786-be2b-417d-be6f-49a7203a7e6f","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 15:45:13","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":189030,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCountry Collaboration Network Plot\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"image4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8142405/v1/fea54ed0382c77eb77c4013c.png"},{"id":97900076,"identity":"d63da0dc-7e4d-4c32-8c50-19a7c57bca4f","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 15:45:12","extension":"png","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":193723,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eInstitutional Collaboration Network Plot\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"image5.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8142405/v1/546b97ec7149572a5a10c708.png"},{"id":97900506,"identity":"d03b93bb-1fd3-48d9-bcb0-1b56b166f9e4","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 15:45:35","extension":"png","order_by":6,"title":"Figure 6","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":434868,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eKeyword Co-occurrence Network Plot\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"image6.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8142405/v1/ab312d6de39679b0acb1bcf7.png"},{"id":97900646,"identity":"618ce6cc-424a-481f-a9df-686406e31b8f","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 15:45:42","extension":"png","order_by":7,"title":"Figure 7","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":730964,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eThematic Map Plot\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"image7.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8142405/v1/a8bb2b1ba6b1143a41c3316d.png"},{"id":101855421,"identity":"ece0963c-8d12-43e2-a8b6-69a1559a03db","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-02-04 10:43:08","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":3927320,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8142405/v1/2e6476e6-2c81-42b3-9955-6b5ef6d65e19.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"A Bibliometric Analysis of Technology-Enhanced Early Childhood Education: 2005–2025","fulltext":[{"header":"1. INTRODUCTION","content":"\u003cp\u003eEarly Childhood Education (ECE) is globally recognized as a cornerstone of human development and societal progress. A robust body of research demonstrates that quality early learning experiences provide profound long-term benefits, including enhanced cognitive and social-emotional development, improved academic outcomes, and greater future earning potential (Schiariti et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). ECE is also a powerful tool for promoting social equity; by providing foundational support to disadvantaged children, it can disrupt intergenerational cycles of poverty and reduce systemic inequalities, making it a crucial component of global development agendas like the Sustainable Development Goals (Bascop\u0026eacute; et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Rad et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Sj\u0026ouml;gren, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Investing in children's earliest years is thus fundamental to fostering resilient individuals and building prosperous, sustainable societies (Miseliunaite et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Grosseck et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). To understand how these priorities evolve in practice, it is essential to map where the field\u0026rsquo;s scholarly attention concentrates\u0026mdash;especially as digital tools increasingly mediate early learning and professional practice.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eReflecting this global significance, Early Childhood Education has evolved into a vast and dynamic field of academic inquiry over the past two decades. The volume of research has grown exponentially, driven by an intensified multidisciplinary interest that now extends far beyond traditional pedagogy (Fauzi, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Hern\u0026aacute;ndez-Torrano \u0026amp; Ibrayeva, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). The field's scope now encompasses a wide array of contemporary issues, including public policy and governance (Sarı \u0026amp; Aypay, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e), the integration of educational technology and data-informed practice (Su et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Boateng et al., 2024), teacher well-being and commitment (Li et al., 2024; Xue et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e), and family-community engagement (Sağlam et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). The COVID-19 shock accelerated digital adoption and exposed equity gaps, transforming ECE into a complex, and at times fragmented, field of study (Su et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Bozkurt et al., 2022). A transparent, quantitative map of these shifts\u0026mdash;linking core ECE topics with technology-related themes\u0026mdash;can clarify how the research front is reorganizing and where evidence gaps persist.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis tremendous growth, however, presents a significant scholarly challenge. The sheer volume and interdisciplinary nature of ECE research make it increasingly difficult for scholars, practitioners, and policymakers to gain a clear and comprehensive overview of its intellectual landscape (Bui et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Wang \u0026amp; Lv, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Important developments, emerging trends, and foundational paradigms can become dispersed across a multitude of journals and domains, leading to an \"information overload\" that obscures major patterns and hinders systematic knowledge assessment (Bozkurt et al., 2022; Guo, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Huang et al., 2019). Without a clear map of the research terrain, stakeholders struggle to identify where evidence is strongest, which areas are gaining momentum, and where critical knowledge gaps persist (Eadie et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Latorre-Medina \u0026amp; Abdelmaula-Mesaud, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study addresses these critical gaps in the existing literature. While numerous narrative and systematic reviews have provided invaluable insights into specific ECE topics\u0026mdash;such as environmental education (Ardoin \u0026amp; Bowers, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), school transitions (Jindal-Snape et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), and leadership (Nicholson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e)\u0026mdash;they are often focused on niche subjects or can be subjective in their literature selection. Moreover, traditional qualitative review methods lack the capacity to systematically process thousands of publications to reveal macro-level patterns of productivity, collaboration, and thematic evolution (Goyal \u0026amp; Kumar, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Patil et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Alamoodi et al., 2019). Consequently, a comprehensive and objective map of the global ECE research field over the last two decades is conspicuously lacking. Bibliometric analysis offers a powerful, data-driven methodology to overcome these limitations (Brika et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Aktoprak \u0026amp; Hursen, 2022).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe primary aim of this study is to conduct a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of the Early Childhood Education Journal, a leading publication in the field, from 2005 to 2025. By examining this journal's output, we seek to create a detailed map of a significant portion of the ECE research landscape. The study has four specific objectives: (1) to identify the most productive and influential authors, institutions, countries, and journals through performance analysis; (2) to map the primary thematic clusters using keyword co-occurrence analysis; (3) to uncover the intellectual foundations of the journal's research through co-citation analysis; and (4) to trace the evolution of research themes over time. This study will provide the first large-scale \"map\" of a major academic journal in this field, revealing its intellectual and social structure. Ultimately, it will create an invaluable resource for stakeholders to navigate the vast ECE literature, identify key trends, and make evidence-informed decisions that benefit young children worldwide (C., \u0026amp; C\u0026eacute;line, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Cretu \u0026amp; Morandau, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Gassanova \u0026amp; Kozhakhmet, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. LITERATURE REVIEW","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis chapter reviews the literature underpinning the current study in three sections. The first establishes the conceptual framework, reviewing the principles of bibliometrics for science mapping and the foundational ECE theories expected to be found in the data. The second synthesizes findings from previous narrative and bibliometric reviews of ECE and related domains, identifying the specific gaps this study addresses. The final section reviews key bibliometric analysis techniques, justifying the study's data-driven contribution to understanding the ECE research landscape.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBibliometrics provides a theoretical framework for the quantitative study of a scientific field's dynamics, a discipline often referred to as the \"science of science\" (Grosseck et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). This approach assumes that academic publications and their associated metadata serve as valid proxies for scientific activity, collaboration, and influence (Brika et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Sarı \u0026amp; Aypay, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). This methodology maps the empirical structure of a discipline through foundational concepts that describe patterns in scholarly communication. For example, Price's theory of scientific growth posits that science expands exponentially, leading to an \"information overload\" that necessitates quantitative mapping tools like bibliometrics (Guo, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). This growth often adheres to Lotka's Law, which demonstrates that a small number of prolific authors are responsible for a majority of a field's publications (Anwar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Similarly, Bradford's Law explains that a few core journals publish the most significant articles on a topic, justifying the use of publication and citation counts to identify key sources and influential players in a research domain (Wang \u0026amp; Lv, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBibliometrics also provides theories for mapping the intellectual structure of research fields. Co-citation analysis, developed by Small and Griffith, assumes that documents frequently cited together share thematic links, allowing researchers to uncover a field's intellectual base\u0026mdash;the foundational theories and paradigms underlying current research (Cretu \u0026amp; Morandau, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Khanra et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). This technique reveals the major schools of thought and intellectual cornerstones of a discipline (Aktoprak \u0026amp; Hursen, 2022; Robertson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Concurrently, keyword co-occurrence analysis maps the \"research front\" by identifying active conceptual connections. When keywords frequently appear together, it indicates a nexus of active research, allowing for the identification of thematic clusters and emerging topics that show a field's evolving interests (Su et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Theodoraki et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe ECE literature itself is grounded in several foundational theories, and a bibliometric analysis is expected to reveal their prominence within the field's intellectual base. Constructivist theories, notably from Piaget and Vygotsky, frame children as active constructors of knowledge through environmental and social interaction, shaping pedagogical approaches that emphasize play, inquiry, and social learning (Miseliunaite et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; O\u0026rsquo;Connor et al., 2021). Another key theoretical lens is Bronfenbrenner's socio-ecological systems theory, which provides a framework for understanding child development within nested environmental systems, from the immediate family to broader societal contexts, thereby examining the interconnected influences on children's learning and well-being (Gassanova \u0026amp; Kozhakhmet, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Sağlam et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Finally, attachment theory, developed by Bowlby, is expected to feature prominently in research concerning the critical role of secure relationships between children and caregivers for healthy social and emotional development (Chen \u0026amp; McDunn, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Sağlam et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). These theories represent the core conceptual content that this bibliometric mapping will quantify within the ECE research landscape.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTraditional narrative reviews have long served as the primary method for synthesizing knowledge in Early Childhood Education. These qualitative syntheses have been instrumental in identifying major themes, debates, and challenges within the field. For instance, reviews have highlighted the persistent tensions between play-based pedagogies and more structured, academic-focused curricula (O\u0026rsquo;Reilly et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Grieshaber et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). They have tracked the global policy push toward universal ECE access (Rad et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), examined the multifaceted domains of quality in ECE settings (Eadie et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), and explored the integration of technology and sustainability into early learning (Papavlasopoulou et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; G\u0026uuml;ler Yıldız et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Through qualitative interpretation, these studies have articulated core challenges, from fostering metacognition and critical thinking to ensuring equitable outcomes for diverse and migrant children (Chen \u0026amp; McDunn, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Boldermo \u0026amp; \u0026Oslash;degaard, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Guo, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHowever, narrative reviews face significant limitations in an era of explosive information growth. They can be selective and subject to author biases, potentially overlooking counter-arguments or emerging trends (Fauzi, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Li \u0026amp; Abdul Talib, 2024). Their most critical limitation is their inability to systematically process vast amounts of literature to analyze macro-level patterns in productivity, collaboration, or thematic evolution (Behl et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Goyal \u0026amp; Kumar, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). As such, they cannot provide a comprehensive, objective overview of a field's structure, leaving a significant gap in our understanding of the ECE research landscape as a whole. This gap has prompted researchers in education to increasingly turn to bibliometric analysis to map trends in various sub-fields (Huang et al., 2019; Wang et al., 2024).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWithin ECE, a growing number of focused bibliometric studies have begun to chart specific territories. These analyses have examined the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic (Su et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), the state of research on diversity (Guo, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), teacher commitment (Xue et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e), and the integration of STEM and technology (Bui et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Su et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Rodrigues-Silva \u0026amp; Alsina, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Similar studies in broader education have mapped fields like creativity (Hern\u0026aacute;ndez-Torrano \u0026amp; Ibrayeva, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), educational technologies (Bizel, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Bacca-Acosta et al., 2021; Boateng et al., 2024), and sustainability education (Gorski et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). However, a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of the mainstream, overarching field of Early Childhood Education for the 21st century remains a critical missing piece.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBibliometric analysis employs a suite of quantitative techniques for performance analysis and science mapping. Performance analysis measures productivity and impact through metrics like publication counts, citation rates, and the h-index (\u0026Ouml;zdemir et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Sindhu \u0026amp; Gupta, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Science mapping visualizes intellectual and social relationships. Co-authorship analysis, for instance, reveals collaborative clusters among authors, institutions, and countries, illustrating the social architecture of knowledge production (Cardella et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Ramos-Pla \u0026amp; Fornons Casol, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e; Hakimi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). To map intellectual structures, researchers use co-citation and keyword co-occurrence analyses, often with software like VOSviewer or CiteSpace, to generate network maps where nodes represent items (e.g., authors, keywords) and links indicate the strength of their relationship (Gorski et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Latorre-Medina \u0026amp; Abdelmaula-Mesaud, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). These methods provide a powerful, data-driven, and comprehensive view of a field's trajectory (Zeng et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Kaur \u0026amp; Bhatia, 2024; Karali et al., 2021; Matengu et al., 2020; O\u0026rsquo;Connor et al., 2021; Patil et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Sj\u0026ouml;gren, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Talukder et al., 2024).\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"3. METHODOLOGY","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.1 Research Design\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study employed a quantitative bibliometric design to map the intellectual, conceptual, and social structure of research in \u003cem\u003eEarly Childhood Education (ECE)\u003c/em\u003e over a twenty-year period. Bibliometrics was selected because it enables an objective, data-driven overview of publication trends, citation impact, and thematic evolution across large document sets (Brika et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Aktoprak \u0026amp; Hursen, 2022). The design followed the standard workflow of \u003cem\u003eperformance analysis\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003escience mapping\u003c/em\u003e using the \u003cb\u003eR\u003c/b\u003e package \u003cem\u003ebibliometrix\u003c/em\u003e (Aria \u0026amp; Cuccurullo, 2017).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.2 Data Source and Search Strategy\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eAll data were retrieved from the \u003cb\u003eScopus\u003c/b\u003e database, which offers extensive coverage of peer-reviewed educational research and complete citation metadata. The search was conducted on \u003cb\u003e7 July 2025\u003c/b\u003e, restricted to the \u003cb\u003esource title \u0026ldquo;Early Childhood Education Journal\u0026rdquo;\u003c/b\u003e to ensure disciplinary focus and comparability.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eSearch string (Scopus advanced)\u003c/b\u003e:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSOURCE(\"Early Childhood Education Journal\") AND PUBYEAR\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;2004 AND PUBYEAR\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;2026 AND (LIMIT-TO(DOCTYPE,\"ar\") OR LIMIT-TO(DOCTYPE,\"re\"))\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDocument types were limited to \u003cb\u003earticles\u003c/b\u003e and \u003cb\u003ereviews\u003c/b\u003e; editorial material, notes, and errata were excluded.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAfter applying filters and removing duplicates, \u003cb\u003e1,913 records\u003c/b\u003e were retained as the final corpus.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.3 Data Cleaning and Preparation\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eMetadata (authors, titles, keywords, affiliations, references, and citation counts) were exported in BibTeX format and imported into \u003cem\u003ebibliometrix\u003c/em\u003e (version 4.2). Data cleaning included:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cul\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003estandardizing author names through algorithmic disambiguation,\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003emerging synonymous keywords (e.g., \u003cem\u003eICT\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003einformation technology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003edigital learning\u003c/em\u003e \u0026rarr; \u0026ldquo;educational technology\u0026rdquo;), and\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003everifying institutional names against the Scopus Affiliation ID registry.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe cleaned dataset was saved as \u003cb\u003eOnline Resource 1\u003c/b\u003e, and a variable dictionary is provided in \u003cb\u003eOnline Resource 2\u003c/b\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ul\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.4 Analytical Framework\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eTwo complementary analyses were performed:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e(a) Performance Analysis\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDescriptive indicators\u0026mdash;annual scientific production, citation rate, author productivity (h-index, g-index), and geographic/institutional distribution\u0026mdash;were computed.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAuthorship and country outputs were calculated using \u003cb\u003efull counting\u003c/b\u003e; \u003cb\u003efractional counting\u003c/b\u003e was applied for authors to adjust for multi-authored papers. Citations per publication (CPP) and field-normalized citations per year were used to reduce age bias across periods (2005\u0026ndash;2015 vs 2016\u0026ndash;2025).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e(b) Science Mapping\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eScience mapping visualized conceptual and social structures through:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cul\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eKeyword co-occurrence\u003c/b\u003e (research themes),\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCo-citation analysis\u003c/b\u003e (intellectual foundations), and\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCo-authorship networks\u003c/b\u003e (collaboration patterns).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ul\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor the keyword network:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cul\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003enormalization\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;\u003cem\u003eassociation strength\u003c/em\u003e,\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003elayout\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;\u003cem\u003eFruchterman\u0026ndash;Reingold\u003c/em\u003e,\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eclustering\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;\u003cem\u003eLouvain algorithm\u003c/em\u003e (resolution\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.00, random seed\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;123),\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eminimum keyword occurrence\u0026thinsp;\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;5. Sensitivity checks at thresholds 3 and 7 confirmed structural robustness. Network parameters (number of nodes/edges, modularity Q, and cluster count K) are reported with each figure.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ul\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.5 Software and Reproducibility\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eAll analyses were conducted in \u003cb\u003eR 4.5.1\u003c/b\u003e using \u003cem\u003ebibliometrix\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003ebiblioshiny\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eGraphical outputs were exported in high-resolution (.svg and .pdf) for accessibility.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSession information and code scripts are provided in \u003cb\u003eOnline Resource 3\u003c/b\u003e to ensure reproducibility.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eRaw Scopus records cannot be redistributed due to licensing restrictions.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.6 Ethical and Data Considerations\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study used publicly available bibliographic metadata; hence, \u003cb\u003eno human participants or personal data were involved\u003c/b\u003e, and \u003cb\u003eethics approval was not required\u003c/b\u003e. Data management complied with \u003cb\u003eSpringer Nature Research Data Policy\u003c/b\u003e, and a \u003cb\u003eData Availability Statement\u003c/b\u003e is included in the Declarations.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.7 Validation of Findings\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo validate robustness:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003col\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eCross-checking top authors, institutions, and cited papers against \u003cem\u003eScopus Author Profiles\u003c/em\u003e confirmed data accuracy.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eThematic clusters were triangulated with earlier bibliometric and narrative reviews (e.g., Goyal \u0026amp; Kumar, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Su et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eTemporal analysis compared cluster persistence across periods to assess thematic evolution and alignment with global ECE priorities.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4. RESULTS","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe analysis of 1,913 documents published in the \u003cem\u003eEarly Childhood Education Journal\u003c/em\u003e between 2005 and 2025 reveals a dynamic and growing field of research.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e4.1. Descriptive Overview of the Journal's Output\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eOver the last two decades, the journal has demonstrated a significant annual growth rate of 9.12%. As shown in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, the number of articles published per year was relatively stable in the first decade of the analysis period but has seen a dramatic increase since 2020, peaking in 2024 with 274 articles. The average article has an age of 7.34 years and has received approximately 14.44 citations. The average number of citations per article per year has fluctuated, with notable peaks around 2010 and a general decline in recent years, which is expected as newer papers have had less time to accrue citations (see Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e4.2. Most Influential Authors and Manuscripts\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe analysis identified the most prolific and impactful authors contributing to the journal. As detailed in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, M. R. Jalongo was the most productive author with 34 articles, followed by K. J. Swick (21 articles) and A. C. Rule (16 articles). In terms of citation impact, K. J. Swick holds the highest h-index (13) among the top authors, indicating a consistent and influential body of work. The author dominance analysis (Table\u0026nbsp;2) reveals that authors such as O. N. Saracho and B. A. Walsh frequently publish as first authors, suggesting leadership roles in their research teams. The production timeline of the top 15 authors (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e) illustrates their career trajectories and periods of peak impact within the journal.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTop 10 Most Productive Authors by Number of Publications (2005\u0026ndash;2025)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eRank\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAuthor\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eArticles\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAuthor (Fractionalized)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eArticles (Fractionalized)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eJALONGO MR\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e34\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eJALONGO MR\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e26.70\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSWICK KJ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e21\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSWICK KJ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e15.08\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eRULE AC\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e16\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eZEECE PD\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e11.83\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eZEECE PD\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e14\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eRULE AC\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e7.23\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eEBBECK M\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e12\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBOYER W\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e7.00\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePARETTE HP\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSARACHO ON\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e7.00\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eROBERTS SK\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLEE BY\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e5.00\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBOYER W\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eECKHOFF A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4.83\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eGERDE HK\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eCUN A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4.50\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eKWON K-A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eEBBECK M\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4.03\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003ctfoot\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote.\u003c/em\u003e Fractionalized authorship assigns credit based on the number of co-authors for each paper.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tfoot\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe most influential publications form the intellectual foundation of the journal. Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e lists the top 10 most cited articles from the analysis period. The 2013 article by Kazakoff et al. on the impact of educational apps is the most cited work, with 311 citations. This is followed by Denham et al.'s (2012) work on preschoolers' social-emotional competence (295 citations) and Hall-Kenyon et al.'s (2014) study on preschool teacher-child relationships (232 citations). These highly cited works underscore the journal's focus on technology in education and social-emotional learning.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTop 10 Most Cited Manuscripts in the Corpus (2005\u0026ndash;2025)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eRank\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePaper\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTC\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTC per Year\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eKAZAKOFF ER, 2013\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e311\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e23.92\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDENHAM SA, 2012\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e295\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e21.07\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHALL-KENYON KM, 2014\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e232\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e19.33\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eNEUMANN MM, 2014\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e210\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e17.50\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eVENETSANOU F, 2010\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e199\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e12.44\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eCUMMING T, 2017\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e171\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e19.00\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSANDSETER EBH, 2009\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e171\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e10.06\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSKWARCHUK S-L, 2009\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e163\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e9.59\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eASHIABI GS, 2007\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e161\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e8.47\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSOUTO-MANNING M, 2006\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e161\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e8.05\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003ctfoot\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"4\"\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote.\u003c/em\u003e TC\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Total Citations.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tfoot\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e4.3. Geographic and Institutional Landscape\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe analysis of corresponding authors' countries reveals a strong concentration of research originating from the United States, which contributed 1,201 articles (65.1%). This is followed by Australia (89 articles) and Canada (81 articles). The international co-authorship rate is relatively low at 8.73%, and the country collaboration network (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e) shows a large, dense cluster of US-based collaborations with more sparse connections to other international research groups. This suggests that while the journal has an international readership, its authorship base is predominantly North American.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe institutional collaboration network (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e) further illustrates these patterns. A large, central cluster of collaborating US universities is evident, including institutions like the University of South Carolina, Michigan State University, and the University of Central Florida. Other smaller, more isolated clusters represent collaborations within other countries or specific regional partnerships.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e4.4. Conceptual Structure and Thematic Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe keyword co-occurrence network (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e) reveals the conceptual structure of the research published in the journal. Two primary clusters emerged. The largest cluster (red) is centered on foundational and pedagogical topics, with \"early childhood education,\" \"preschool,\" \"play,\" and \"professional development\" as key nodes. A second, distinct cluster (blue) focuses on literacy-related topics, including \"early literacy,\" \"emergent literacy,\" \"writing,\" and \"children's literature.\" The keyword \"COVID-19\" appears as a more recent but central node within the main pedagogical cluster, indicating its significant impact on the field.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe thematic map (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig7\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e) provides further insight into the development and importance of these research themes.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cul\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eMotor Themes (Upper-Right)\u003c/b\u003e: This quadrant is not densely populated, suggesting that few topics are both well-developed and central. \"Special education\" and \"parenting\" appear here, indicating they are established and important research areas.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eBasic Themes (Lower-Right)\u003c/b\u003e: This quadrant is the most populated, containing the core, transversal themes of the journal. Keywords such as \"early literacy,\" \"play,\" \"preschool,\" \"professional development,\" and \"teacher education\" are located here, confirming their fundamental importance to the field.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eNiche Themes (Upper-Left)\u003c/b\u003e: These are well-developed but more specialized topics. \"Shared book reading\" and \"scholarly writing\" are prominent examples, representing specific, mature areas of research.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eEmerging or Declining Themes (Lower-Left)\u003c/b\u003e: This quadrant contains themes that are either new or losing prominence. Notably, \"COVID-19 pandemic\" appears here as a recent and developing topic. Other themes like \"child care\" and \"qualitative research\" are also present, suggesting they are less central but still active areas of study.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ul\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAn analysis of thematic evolution was conducted to map changes in core topics over time. However, the analysis was unable to generate an evolutionary map, as there was insufficient thematic overlap between the 2005\u0026ndash;2015 and 2016\u0026ndash;2025 periods. This is a significant finding in itself, suggesting that the research focus of the journal is highly dynamic and has undergone a substantial thematic shift in the last decade.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"5. DISCUSSION","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis bibliometric analysis of the Early Childhood Education Journal provides a data-driven map of the field's trajectory from 2005 to 2025. The findings are interpreted here within the broader literature, comparing the journal's productivity, contributors, and conceptual structure to established theories and empirical evidence. The results confirm that the journal serves as a critical barometer for the ECE research landscape, reflecting its accelerating growth, key intellectual priorities, and dynamic response to contemporary challenges. The analysis reveals an accelerating growth in publications, particularly since 2020, which supports the broader trend of ECE's expansion as a major field of academic inquiry (Hern\u0026aacute;ndez-Torrano \u0026amp; Ibrayeva, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Grosseck et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). The recent spike aligns with studies noting the profound impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on educational research, as systems worldwide grappled with challenges like remote learning, digital equity, and heightened parental stress (Su et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Bozkurt et al., 2022). This journal has clearly been a key vehicle for disseminating this crisis-responsive research.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe geographical concentration of authorship, with the United States contributing 65.1% of articles, aligns with findings from other bibliometric studies that show a continued dominance of research from the Global North in education (Cretu \u0026amp; Morandau, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Grosseck et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Brika et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). The low international co-authorship rate (8.73%) and the US-centric collaboration network suggest that while the journal has a global readership, its authorship base may not fully represent diverse global perspectives, particularly from the Global South, an issue highlighted as a critical gap in ECE research (Boldermo \u0026amp; \u0026Oslash;degaard, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). The author productivity distribution, with a small number of scholars like M. R. Jalongo and K. J. Swick producing a large volume of publications, validates Lotka's Law within this domain and highlights how a core group of scholars can significantly shape disciplinary discourse (Anwar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Wang \u0026amp; Lv, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe analysis of the most-cited manuscripts reveals the journal's intellectual priorities and its role in advancing key debates. The top-cited article by Kazakoff et al. (2013) on educational apps, along with other highly cited works, confirms that the integration of digital tools is a central and enduring theme in modern ECE research (Su et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Latorre-Medina \u0026amp; Abdelmaula-Mesaud, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). This reflects the field's diversification beyond traditional pedagogy, as noted in other large-scale reviews (Huang et al., 2019). The prominence of technology-focused articles indicates this journal's significant role in the intersection of early learning and digital innovation (Bacca-Acosta et al., 2021; Bizel, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). At the same time, the high citation rates for articles on social-emotional competence (Denham et al., 2012) and teacher-child relationships (Hall-Kenyon et al., 2014) demonstrate a sustained interest in the relational aspects of ECE. This aligns perfectly with foundational ECE theories, reflecting the enduring influence of Bowlby's attachment theory and Bronfenbrenner's socio-ecological systems theory, which emphasize the primacy of secure relationships and supportive environments in healthy child development (Sağlam et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Jindal-Snape et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Chen \u0026amp; McDunn, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe keyword co-occurrence network clearly delineates two primary conceptual domains: a foundational pedagogical cluster and a specialized literacy cluster. The pedagogical cluster, with central nodes like \"play,\" \"professional development,\" and \"teacher education,\" aligns with the \"Basic Themes\" identified in the thematic map, grounding the journal in core constructivist principles that view play as a primary vehicle for learning (O\u0026rsquo;Connor et al., 2021; Grieshaber et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; O\u0026rsquo;Reilly et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). The separate literacy cluster signifies a major, well-defined research area, a finding reinforced by the thematic map where \"shared book reading\" appears as a \"Niche Theme\" (Khanra et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). The positioning of \"COVID-19 pandemic\" as a recent, central node in the keyword network and an \"Emerging Theme\" powerfully demonstrates the journal's responsiveness to global events, showing how a major external shock can rapidly reconfigure a field's research agenda (Su et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Bozkurt et al., 2022; Fauzi, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA particularly telling finding is the lack of thematic overlap in the evolutionary analysis between the 2005\u0026ndash;2015 and 2016\u0026ndash;2025 periods, which indicates substantial thematic shifts over the last decade. This suggests the field is not just growing but is also rapidly evolving, with older research themes being replaced or reconfigured by new ones. This provides strong empirical evidence that ECE is an increasingly complex and dynamic field, constantly adapting to new social and technological realities (Hern\u0026aacute;ndez-Torrano \u0026amp; Ibrayeva, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Huang et al., 2019). This bibliometric analysis provides an objective, data-driven map that confirms broad trends noted in narrative reviews while adding structural and quantitative precision, offering a comprehensive understanding of how a leading journal reflects and shapes the dynamics of ECE research (Goyal \u0026amp; Kumar, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Brika et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Aktoprak \u0026amp; Hursen, 2022).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePractical significance. Our maps show that technology-related terms moved from peripheral to basic themes while core ECE constructs (play, early literacy, SEL) remained central. For teacher education, this implies embedding technology-rich play and early literacy tools in practicum and mentoring. For equity and inclusion, it underscores assistive/differentiated digital supports and home\u0026ndash;school platforms that bridge families and classrooms. For research capacity, the US-centric, low cross-border collaboration highlights the need for funded Global South partnerships and shared data infrastructures\u0026mdash;particularly on inclusion and digital access.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"6. CONCLUSION","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study conducted a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of Early Childhood Education (ECE) research from 2005 to 2025, based on 1,913 Scopus-indexed articles published in the Early Childhood Education Journal. The analysis provided a data-driven understanding of how the field has evolved conceptually, intellectually, and socially over the last two decades. Overall, the results confirm that ECE has entered a new phase of scholarly expansion characterized by rapid growth, diversification of themes, and increasing\u0026mdash;though still uneven\u0026mdash;global participation. The field exhibits a strong and consistent annual growth rate (9.12%), reflecting ECE\u0026rsquo;s expanding global relevance and the intensifying research interest in early learning, teacher development, and inclusion. At the same time, the citation structure reveals that a relatively small group of highly productive authors and institutions continues to shape the discourse, consistent with Lotka\u0026rsquo;s and Bradford\u0026rsquo;s bibliometric regularities.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe analysis of thematic structures highlights a dual evolution in the research front. Foundational topics\u0026mdash;play, professional development, early literacy, and teacher education\u0026mdash;remain central, confirming the field\u0026rsquo;s theoretical continuity and pedagogical foundations. However, the emergence and consolidation of technology-related and inclusion-oriented keywords such as digital learning, remote teaching, assistive technology, and COVID-19 signify a decisive paradigmatic shift. These findings suggest that the global ECE community is reconfiguring its intellectual agenda toward technology-enhanced pedagogy and equitable access to early learning opportunities.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe co-authorship and collaboration networks expose a highly concentrated authorship base, dominated by the United States, with limited cross-border partnerships. This concentration, while reflecting the journal\u0026rsquo;s North American origins, underscores an urgent need for greater international and South\u0026ndash;South collaboration to ensure more diverse and culturally responsive perspectives in ECE research. Enhancing research connectivity through international scholar networks, data-sharing platforms, and collaborative funding schemes could significantly enrich the field\u0026rsquo;s global representativeness. From a methodological standpoint, this study demonstrates the value of bibliometric analysis for visualizing the dynamic evolution of educational research. The combined use of performance indicators and science mapping provided a reproducible and transparent framework for identifying trends, intellectual foundations, and thematic transitions. Importantly, this approach offers a template for future educational technology and policy studies, showing how structured bibliometric workflows can inform data-driven decision-making in education research and practice.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn summary, the findings reveal that while traditional pedagogical constructs continue to anchor the ECE field, the digital transformation of teaching and learning has become a defining trajectory of contemporary research. The coexistence of continuity and disruption reflects the field\u0026rsquo;s adaptive capacity\u0026mdash;retaining its developmental focus while embracing innovation and equity in digital contexts. Looking ahead, researchers should pursue three strategic directions:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cul\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eIntegrative research that links pedagogical theories with digital design, analytics, and inclusive practices in early learning.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eGlobal collaboration frameworks that elevate underrepresented regions and foster comparative insights across diverse cultural and technological contexts.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eOpen and reproducible science practices\u0026mdash;including shared bibliometric datasets and transparent analytical codes\u0026mdash;to strengthen methodological integrity in educational research.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ul\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBy combining traditional developmental priorities with emerging digital paradigms, Early Childhood Education is poised to advance as a data-rich, inclusive, and technologically adaptive discipline. The bibliometric evidence presented here not only maps where the field has been but also guides where it must go to sustain equitable and innovative learning for all young children.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e6.1. IMPLICATIONS FOR POLICY AND PRACTICE\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe findings of this bibliometric analysis carry significant implications for the design of policies and professional practices that govern early childhood education in the digital era. The study\u0026rsquo;s evidence base\u0026mdash;drawn from two decades of international research\u0026mdash;provides a roadmap for strengthening system-level strategies, teacher professional development, and institutional capacity building.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003ePolicy Implications\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eInvest in Technology-Enhanced Early Learning Infrastructure\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe emergence of digital learning, remote instruction, and assistive technologies as dominant themes underscores the need for sustained investment in technological infrastructure across early learning settings. Policymakers should prioritize equitable access to reliable internet, child-appropriate devices, and adaptive digital resources that support inclusive participation, especially in low-resource and rural contexts.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eInstitutionalize Data-Informed Decision-Making\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eBibliometric evidence shows a growing use of technology and data analytics in ECE research. National and regional authorities can leverage these insights to develop data-driven monitoring systems that assess the quality, reach, and impact of early learning programs. Such systems would align with the global call for evidence-based policymaking under SDG 4.2.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePromote International and South\u0026ndash;South Research Collaboration\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe pronounced concentration of publications in the Global North highlights a structural imbalance in knowledge production. Ministries of education, higher education commissions, and donor agencies should develop funding schemes that encourage collaborative research projects, co-authorship networks, and cross-country data sharing to ensure the global representativeness of ECE research.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEmbed Continuous Professional Development (CPD) in National Standards\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe consistent prominence of \u0026ldquo;professional development\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;teacher education\u0026rdquo; as basic themes indicates that sustained teacher training remains critical. Policymakers should integrate evidence-based CPD requirements into licensing frameworks and accreditation standards, emphasizing digital pedagogy, inclusive design, and ethical technology use.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSupport Open Science and Research Transparency\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe reproducible bibliometric approach employed in this study illustrates how open data, coding transparency, and visualization tools enhance knowledge accessibility. Governments and research councils should adopt open-data mandates and encourage repositories that host educational datasets and bibliometric metadata.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003ePractice Implications\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRedefine Professional Competence for the Digital Classroom\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003ePractitioners must blend traditional play-based pedagogies with digital tools that enhance early literacy, creativity, and social-emotional learning. Integrating technology meaningfully\u0026mdash;rather than as an add-on\u0026mdash;requires educators to design learning experiences that combine play, collaboration, and interactivity.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eIntegrate Inclusive Digital Pedagogies\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe increasing presence of \u0026ldquo;inclusion\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;special education\u0026rdquo; in recent research signals the profession\u0026rsquo;s ethical responsibility to ensure equitable access for all learners. Teachers should adopt adaptive technologies, multimodal materials, and assistive devices that accommodate diverse needs, languages, and learning styles.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFoster Home\u0026ndash;School Digital Partnerships\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe rise of research on family and community engagement suggests that digital communication platforms can strengthen continuity between school and home. Practitioners should use parent portals, learning apps, and virtual storytelling sessions to extend learning beyond the classroom, enhancing collaboration and trust with families.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eUtilize Data for Reflective Practice\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eEducators can employ analytics from digital tools to monitor learner engagement, identify gaps, and adjust instruction. Data literacy should thus become a component of professional training, enabling teachers to interpret usage metrics, learning traces, and formative assessment data responsibly.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLeverage Bibliometric Evidence for Curriculum Review\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eSchool leaders and teacher educators can use bibliometric maps to identify research-backed areas\u0026mdash;such as early literacy, play, and professional development\u0026mdash;when updating curricula and designing pre-service modules. This ensures that classroom practice aligns with global evidence trends while remaining contextually responsive.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eCollectively, these implications emphasize a dual responsibility: policymakers must create enabling environments that fund, regulate, and monitor digital transformation, while practitioners must enact that transformation through reflective, inclusive, and evidence-informed pedagogy. Embedding bibliometric evidence into ECE governance and classroom practice will strengthen the sector\u0026rsquo;s capacity to harness technology responsibly and equitably\u0026mdash;ensuring that every child benefits from high-quality, future-ready early learning opportunities.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec19\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e6.2. STUDY LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhile this study provides the most comprehensive bibliometric mapping of Early Childhood Education (ECE) research within the Early Childhood Education Journal over the past two decades, several methodological and contextual limitations must be acknowledged. Recognizing these constraints not only strengthens the validity of the current findings but also defines pathways for advancing bibliometric research in education.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSingle-Source Dataset\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe analysis focused exclusively on publications from the Early Childhood Education Journal in the Scopus database. Although this journal represents a leading outlet in the field, it cannot capture the full diversity of ECE research published across other venues, especially regional or non-indexed journals. Consequently, findings should be interpreted as reflective of ECEJ\u0026rsquo;s scholarly ecosystem rather than of the global field in its entirety.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDatabase and Language Bias\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eReliance on Scopus may exclude relevant studies indexed in Web of Science, ERIC, or national repositories. Because Scopus predominantly indexes English-language journals, the representation of non-English scholarship\u0026mdash;particularly from Latin America, Asia, and Africa\u0026mdash;remains limited. This may partially explain the geographic concentration observed in the collaboration network.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthorship and Institutional Disambiguation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eDespite algorithmic cleaning, variations in author names, institutional abbreviations, and country affiliations can introduce minor inaccuracies in productivity and collaboration counts. Such limitations are inherent in large-scale bibliometric analyses but were mitigated through manual validation and consistency checks.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eParameter Sensitivity in Science Mapping\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eThematic clusters and co-occurrence networks depend on algorithmic parameters (e.g., threshold values, clustering resolution). Although sensitivity tests at different thresholds produced stable results, minor differences in modularity or cluster granularity could influence the thematic classification of borderline keywords.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eQuantitative\u0026ndash;Qualitative Imbalance\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eBibliometric analysis quantifies patterns of publication and citation but cannot directly evaluate the quality, methodological rigor, or pedagogical depth of individual studies. Therefore, interpretations of thematic significance must be complemented by qualitative or mixed-method analyses that explore the underlying conceptual and theoretical reasoning in the literature.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eFuture Research Directions\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCross-Journal and Cross-Database Comparisons\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eFuture studies should extend the scope beyond ECEJ to include other influential journals and databases (e.g., Web of Science, ERIC, Dimensions). A multi-source approach would enable comparative insights and more balanced global representation of ECE research trends.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eIntegration of Qualitative Content Analysis\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eCombining bibliometrics with systematic or meta-synthetic reviews can yield deeper interpretive insights. For instance, thematic clusters identified here\u0026mdash;such as digital learning or professional development\u0026mdash;could be qualitatively analyzed to uncover dominant pedagogical frameworks and implementation challenges.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTemporal and Predictive Modeling\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eFuture research could employ time-series or machine learning models to forecast emerging trends in ECE scholarship. Topic modeling, burst detection, or longitudinal network analysis could help identify inflection points and anticipate thematic convergence between ECE and educational technology.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eInclusion of Grey and Regional Literature\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo address the underrepresentation of Global South research, subsequent analyses should incorporate dissertations, conference proceedings, and institutional reports. This would create a more inclusive and context-sensitive understanding of ECE knowledge production.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eOpen Data and Reproducible Bibliometrics\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eBuilding on this study\u0026rsquo;s open-science orientation, future researchers are encouraged to share cleaned bibliographic datasets, scripts, and visualizations in public repositories. Such transparency will facilitate replication, foster methodological innovation, and advance the collective accuracy of bibliometric research in education.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhile this study offers a rigorous and transparent map of two decades of ECE scholarship, its value lies equally in outlining a replicable framework for future analyses. Addressing these limitations through broader data inclusion, methodological triangulation, and open-science collaboration will yield a more holistic, equitable, and dynamic understanding of how early childhood education continues to evolve in the digital age.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics, Consent to Participate, and Consent to Publish declarations:\u003c/strong\u003e Not applicable.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding:\u003c/strong\u003e The authors did not receive support from any organization for the submitted work.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConflicts of Interest:\u003c/strong\u003e The authors declare no competing interests.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor Contribution Summary\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll authors contributed substantially to this study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cul type=\"disc\"\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eJibril Abdikadir Ali:\u003c/strong\u003e Conceptualization, methodology, data curation, visualization, writing \u0026ndash; original draft, writing \u0026ndash; final draft, validation.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAbdisalam Hassan Muse:\u003c/strong\u003e Formal analysis, methodology, data curation, visualization, writing \u0026ndash; original draft, validation of final draft.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMustafe Khadar Abdi:\u003c/strong\u003e Supervision, validation, writing \u0026ndash; final draft.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMukhtaar Axmed Cumar:\u003c/strong\u003e Methodology, software, writing \u0026ndash; original draft, writing \u0026ndash; final draft, validation.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHod Abdikarim:\u003c/strong\u003e Conceptualization, final draft review and revision\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll authors reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript and agree to be accountable for its content.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAktoprak, A., \u0026amp; Hursen, C. (2022). A BIBLIOMETRIC AND CONTENT ANALYSIS OF CRITICAL THINKING IN PRIMARY ED UCATION. \u003cem\u003eThinking Skills and Creativity\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e44\u003c/em\u003e, 101029. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101029\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAnwar, M. A., Zhang, Q., Asmi, F., Hussain, N., Plantinga, A., Zafar, M. W., \u0026amp; Sinha, A. (2022). Global perspectives on environmental kuznets curve: A bibliometric rev iew. \u003cem\u003eGondwana Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e103\u003c/em\u003e, 135\u0026ndash;145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gr.2021.11.010\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eArdoin, N. M., \u0026amp; Bowers, A. W. (2020). Early childhood environmental education: A systematic review of the re search literature. \u003cem\u003eEducational Research Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e31\u003c/em\u003e, 100353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100353\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBascop\u0026eacute;, M., Perasso, P., \u0026amp; Reiss, K. (2019). Systematic Review of Education for Sustainable Development at an Early Stage: Cornerstones and Pedagogical Approaches for Teacher Profession al Development. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e(3), 719. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11030719\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBehl, A., Jayawardena, N., Pereira, V., Islam, N., Giudice, M. Del, \u0026amp; Choudrie, J. (2022). Gamification and e-learning for young learners: A systematic literatur e review, bibliometric analysis, and future research agenda. \u003cem\u003eTechnological Forecasting and Social Change\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e176\u003c/em\u003e, 121445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121445\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBIZEL, G. (2023). A Bibliometric Analysis: Metaverse in Education Concept. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Metaverse\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e3\u003c/em\u003e(2), 133\u0026ndash;143. https://doi.org/10.57019/jmv.1310768\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBoldermo, S., \u0026amp; \u0026Oslash;degaard, E. (2019). What about the Migrant Children? The State-Of-The-Art in Research Clai ming Social Sustainability. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e(2), 459. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11020459\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBrika, S. K. M., Algamdi, A., Chergui, K., Musa, A. A., \u0026amp; Zouaghi, R. (2021). Quality of Higher Education: A Bibliometric Review Study. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e6\u003c/em\u003e. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.666087\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBui, T.-L., Nguyen, T.-H., Nguyen, M.-T., Tran, T.-T., Nguyen, T.-L., Tran, V.-N., Dang, U. P., Vu, C.-T., \u0026amp; Hoang, A.-D. (2024). Research on STEM in Early Childhood Education from 1992 to 2022: A Bib liometric Analysis from the Web of Science Database. \u003cem\u003eEuropean Journal of Educational Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003evolume-13-2024\u003c/em\u003e(volume-13-issue-3-july-2024), 1057\u0026ndash;1075. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.13.3.1057\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eC., S., \u0026amp; C\u0026eacute;line, V. (2022). Editorial. \u003cem\u003eContemporary Issues in Early Childhood\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e23\u003c/em\u003e(2), 107\u0026ndash;108. https://doi.org/10.1177/14639491221100618\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCardella, G. M., Hern\u0026aacute;ndez-S\u0026aacute;nchez, B. R., \u0026amp; S\u0026aacute;nchez-Garc\u0026iacute;a, J. C. (2020). Women Entrepreneurship: A Systematic Review to Outline the Boundaries of Scientific Literature. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01557\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChen, S., \u0026amp; McDunn, B. A. (2022). Metacognition: History, measurements, and the role in early childhood development and education. \u003cem\u003eLearning and Motivation\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e78\u003c/em\u003e, 101786. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2022.101786\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCretu, D. M., \u0026amp; Morandau, F. (2022). Bullying and cyberbullying: a bibliometric analysis of three decades o f research in education. \u003cem\u003eEducational Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e76\u003c/em\u003e(2), 371\u0026ndash;404. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2022.2034749\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEadie, P., Page, J., Levickis, P., Elek, C., Murray, L., Wang, L., \u0026amp; Lloyd-Johnsen, C. (2022). Domains of quality in early childhood education and care: A scoping re view of the extent and consistency of the literature. \u003cem\u003eEducational Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e76\u003c/em\u003e(4), 1057\u0026ndash;1086. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2022.2077704\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFauzi, M. A. (2022). E-learning in higher education institutions during COVID-19 pandemic: current and future trends through bibliometric analysis. \u003cem\u003eHeliyon\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e8\u003c/em\u003e(5), e09433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09433\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGassanova, A., \u0026amp; Kozhakhmet, S. (2023). Mapping the landscape of HRM research in higher education: a 40-year r eview and directions for future research. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Educational Management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e38\u003c/em\u003e(1), 158\u0026ndash;177. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijem-04-2023-0189\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGorski, A.-T., Ranf, E.-D., Badea, D., Halmaghi, E.-E., \u0026amp; Gorski, H. (2023). Education for Sustainability\u0026mdash;Some Bibliometric Insights. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e(20), 14916. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152014916\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGoyal, K., \u0026amp; Kumar, S. (2020). Financial literacy: A systematic review and bibliometric analysis. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Consumer Studies\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e45\u003c/em\u003e(1), 80\u0026ndash;105. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12605\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGrieshaber, S., Krieg, S., McArdle, F., \u0026amp; Sumsion, J. (2021). Intentional teaching in early childhood education: A scoping review. \u003cem\u003eReview of Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e9\u003c/em\u003e(3). https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3309\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGrosseck, G., ?\u0026icirc;ru, L. G., \u0026amp; Bran, R. A. (2019). Education for Sustainable Development: Evolution and Perspectives: A B ibliometric Review of Research, 1992\u0026ndash;2018. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e(21), 6136. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11216136\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eG\u0026uuml;ler Yildiz, T., \u0026Ouml;zt\u0026uuml;rk, N., Ilhan Iyi, T., Askar, N., Banko Bal, \u0026Ccedil;., Karabekmez, S., \u0026amp; H\u0026ouml;l, S. (2021). Education for sustainability in early childhood education: a systemati c review. \u003cem\u003eEnvironmental Education Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e27\u003c/em\u003e(6), 796\u0026ndash;820. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2021.1896680\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGuo, K. (2021). A systematic review of early childhood research on diversity and diffe rence (1968\u0026ndash;2019). \u003cem\u003eChildren and Youth Services Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e123\u003c/em\u003e, 105882. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105882\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHakimi, L., Eynon, R., \u0026amp; Murphy, V. A. (2021). The Ethics of Using Digital Trace Data in Education: A Thematic Review of the Research Landscape. \u003cem\u003eReview of Educational Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e91\u003c/em\u003e(5), 671\u0026ndash;717. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543211020116\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHern\u0026aacute;ndez-Torrano, D., \u0026amp; Ibrayeva, L. (2020). Creativity and education: A bibliometric mapping of the research liter ature (1975\u0026ndash;2019). \u003cem\u003eThinking Skills and Creativity\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e35\u003c/em\u003e, 100625. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2019.100625\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHuang, H., Jew, L., \u0026amp; Qi, D. (2023). Take a MOOC and then drop: A systematic review of MOOC engagement patt ern and dropout factor. \u003cem\u003eHeliyon\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e9\u003c/em\u003e(4), e15220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e15220\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJindal-Snape, D., Symonds, J. E., Hannah, E. F. S., \u0026amp; Barlow, W. (2021). Conceptualising Primary-Secondary School Transitions: A Systematic Map ping Review of Worldviews, Theories and Frameworks. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e6\u003c/em\u003e. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.540027\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKaur, J., \u0026amp; Sharma, A. (2021). Conceptual ECCE Happiness Framework for Preschools: To Introduce Impor tance of Happiness to Promote Social and Emotional Competence in Presc hool Children. \u003cem\u003eSage Open\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211031873\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKhanra, S., Dhir, A., Kaur, P., \u0026amp; M\u0026auml;ntym\u0026auml;ki, M. (2021). Bibliometric analysis and literature review of ecotourism: Toward sust ainable development. \u003cem\u003eTourism Management Perspectives\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e37\u003c/em\u003e, 100777. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2020.100777\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLatorre-Medina, M. J., \u0026amp; Abdelmaula-Mesaud, S. (2024). Artificial intelligence applied to early childhood education: A focus for educational research? \u003cem\u003eContemporary Issues in Early Childhood\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e26\u003c/em\u003e(1), 140\u0026ndash;153. https://doi.org/10.1177/14639491241303746\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLi, Y., \u0026amp; Abdul Talib, C. (2024). DEVELOPING A KNOWLEDGE MAP FOR THE EARLY CHILDHOOD STEAM EDUCATION: A VISUAL ANALYSIS USING\u0026ensp;CITESPACE AND HISTCITE. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Baltic Science Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e23\u003c/em\u003e(1), 56\u0026ndash;75. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/24.23.56\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMiseliunaite, B., Kliziene, I., \u0026amp; Cibulskas, G. (2022). Can Holistic Education Solve the World\u0026rsquo;s Problems: A Systematic Litera ture Review. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e14\u003c/em\u003e(15), 9737. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159737\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNicholson, J., Kuhl, K., Maniates, H., Lin, B., \u0026amp; Bonetti, S. (2018). A review of the literature on leadership in early childhood: examining epistemological foundations and considerations of social justice. \u003cem\u003eEarly Child Development and Care\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e190\u003c/em\u003e(2), 91\u0026ndash;122. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2018.1455036\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eO\u0026rsquo;Reilly, C., Devitt, A., \u0026amp; Hayes, N. (2022). Critical thinking in the preschool classroom - A systematic literature review. \u003cem\u003eThinking Skills and Creativity\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e46\u003c/em\u003e, 101110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101110\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026Ouml;zdemir, A., Sipahi, Y., \u0026amp; Bahar, A. K. (2024). The Past, Present, and Future of Research on Mathematical Giftedness: A Bibliometric Analysis. \u003cem\u003eGifted Child Quarterly\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e68\u003c/em\u003e(3), 206\u0026ndash;225. https://doi.org/10.1177/00169862241244717\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePapavlasopoulou, S., Undheim, M., Meaney, T., \u0026amp; Esmaeeli, S. (2024). Early childhood pre-service teachers\u0026rsquo; preparation for using technology with children: a systematic literature review. \u003cem\u003eEuropean Journal of Teacher Education\u003c/em\u003e, 1\u0026ndash;18. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2024.2341935\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePatil, S. S., Sarode, S. C., Sarode, G. S., Gadbail, A. R., Gondivkar, S., Kontham, U. R., \u0026amp; Alqahtani, K. M. (2020). A bibliometric analysis of the 100 most cited articles on early childh ood caries. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Paediatric Dentistry\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e30\u003c/em\u003e(5), 527\u0026ndash;535. https://doi.org/10.1111/ipd.12641\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRad, D., Redes, A., Roman, A., Ignat, S., Lile, R., Demeter, E., Egerau, A., Dughi, T., Balas, E., Maier, R., Kiss, C., Torkos, H., \u0026amp; Rad, G. (2022). Pathways to inclusive and equitable quality early childhood education for achieving SDG4 goal\u0026mdash;a scoping review. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e13\u003c/em\u003e. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.955833\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRamos-Pla, A., \u0026amp; Fornons Casol, L. (2025). Health Education in Early Childhood Education: A Systematic Review of the Literature. \u003cem\u003eSocieties\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e(4), 106. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc15040106\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRobertson, J., Pitt, L., \u0026amp; Ferreira, C. (2020). Entrepreneurial ecosystems and the public sector: A bibliographic anal ysis. \u003cem\u003eSocio-Economic Planning Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e72\u003c/em\u003e, 100862. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2020.100862\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRodrigues-Silva, J., \u0026amp; Alsina, \u0026Aacute;. (2023). STEM/STEAM in Early Childhood Education for Sustainability (ECEfS): A Systematic Review. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e(4), 3721. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043721\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSaglam, M., \u0026Ccedil;elik, O. T., Tun\u0026ccedil;, Y., Kahraman, \u0026Uuml;., A\u0026ccedil;ar, D., \u0026amp; Candemir, B. (2023). Meta-thematic analysis of quality in early childhood education and car e. \u003cem\u003eHumanities and Social Sciences Communications\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e10\u003c/em\u003e(1). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02491-3\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSari, T., \u0026amp; Aypay, A. (2024). A Bibliometric Study of Issues in Educational Policy. \u003cem\u003eEducation Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e14\u003c/em\u003e(6), 568. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14060568\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSchiariti, V., Simeonsson, R. J., \u0026amp; Hall, K. (2021). Promoting Developmental Potential in Early Childhood: A Global Framewo rk for Health and Education. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e18\u003c/em\u003e(4), 2007. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18042007\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSindhu, K., \u0026amp; Gupta, N. (2024). An analysis of the factors affecting access to the early childhood edu cation and care: a systematic literature review and bibliometric analy sis. \u003cem\u003eEarly Years\u003c/em\u003e, 1\u0026ndash;15. https://doi.org/10.1080/09575146.2024.2417229\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSj\u0026ouml;gren, H. (2020). A review of research on the Anthropocene in early childhood education. \u003cem\u003eContemporary Issues in Early Childhood\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e24\u003c/em\u003e(1), 46\u0026ndash;56. https://doi.org/10.1177/1463949120981787\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSu, J., Ng, D. T. K., Yang, W., \u0026amp; Li, H. (2022). Global Trends in the Research on Early Childhood Education during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Bibliometric Analysis. \u003cem\u003eEducation Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e(5), 331. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12050331\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSu, J., Zhong, Y., \u0026amp; Chen, X. (2023). Technology education in early childhood education: a systematic review. \u003cem\u003eInteractive Learning Environments\u003c/em\u003e, 1\u0026ndash;14. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2022.2160470\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTheodoraki, C., Dana, L.-P., \u0026amp; Caputo, A. (2022). Building sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystems: A holistic approach. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Business Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e140\u003c/em\u003e, 346\u0026ndash;360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.11.005\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWang, S., \u0026amp; Lv, X. (2021). Hot Topics and Evolution of Frontier Research in Early Education: A Bi bliometric Mapping of the Research Literature (2001\u0026ndash;2020). \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e13\u003c/em\u003e(16), 9216. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13169216\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eXue, L., Rashid, A. M., \u0026amp; Ouyang, S. (2024). The Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) in High er Education: A Systematic Review. \u003cem\u003eSage Open\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e14\u003c/em\u003e(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440241229570\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZeng, Y., Yang, W., \u0026amp; Bautista, A. (2023). Computational thinking in early childhood education: Reviewing the lit erature and redeveloping the three-dimensional framework. \u003cem\u003eEducational Research Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e39\u003c/em\u003e, 100520. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100520\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"bibliometric analysis, educational technology, early childhood education, science mapping, learning analytics","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8142405/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8142405/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThis study maps how technology-enhanced Early Childhood Education (ECE) research evolved from 2005 to 2025. Using Scopus records from the Early Childhood Education Journal (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1,913), we applied performance analysis and science mapping in R (bibliometrix) to examine production, impact, collaboration, and keyword co-occurrence/thematic structures. Annual output grew by ~\u0026thinsp;9%. Foundational clusters remained centered on play, professional development, and early literacy, while post-2020 terms related to digital tools, remote/hybrid practices, and inclusion rose in salience. Collaboration was US-centric with modest international co-authorship; fractional counts indicated limited cross-border diffusion. We report network parameters (e.g., number of nodes/edges, clustering and modularity) and provide a replicable workflow. Findings inform teacher education (technology-rich play and literacy pedagogies), program design (equitable digital inclusion and home\u0026ndash;school platforms), and policy (incentives for international collaboration and Global South participation). The study clarifies how edtech topics reconfigured the ECE research front during the last decade while core developmental priorities persisted. It also outlines a transparent, reusable approach for edtech-focused bibliometrics in education. Data and code documentation are available on request, respecting Scopus licensing.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"A Bibliometric Analysis of Technology-Enhanced Early Childhood Education: 2005–2025","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-12-10 14:34:05","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8142405/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"336da177-4de9-4d48-92cd-454d0a4d70e5","owner":[],"postedDate":"December 10th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-02-04T10:41:50+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-12-10 14:34:05","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-8142405","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-8142405","identity":"rs-8142405","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}