Educating for Complexity: A Bibliometric Analysis of Systems Thinking in 21st-Century Science Education

Educating for Complexity: A Bibliometric Analysis... | F1000Research "use strict";function _typeof(t){return(_typeof="function"==typeof Symbol&&"symbol"==typeof Symbol.iterator?function(t){return typeof t}:function(t){return t&&"function"==typeof Symbol&&t.constructor===Symbol&&t!==Symbol.prototype?"symbol":typeof t})(t)}!function(){var t=function(){var t,e,o=[],n=window,r=n;for(;r;){try{if(r.frames.__tcfapiLocator){t=r;break}}catch(t){}if(r===n.top)break;r=r.parent}t||(!function t(){var e=n.document,o=!!n.frames.__tcfapiLocator;if(!o)if(e.body){var r=e.createElement("iframe");r.style.cssText="display:none",r.name="__tcfapiLocator",e.body.appendChild(r)}else setTimeout(t,5);return!o}(),n.__tcfapi=function(){for(var t=arguments.length,n=new Array(t),r=0;r 3&&2===parseInt(n[1],10)&&"boolean"==typeof n[3]&&(e=n[3],"function"==typeof n[2]&&n[2]("set",!0)):"ping"===n[0]?"function"==typeof n[2]&&n[2]({gdprApplies:e,cmpLoaded:!1,cmpStatus:"stub"}):o.push(n)},n.addEventListener("message",(function(t){var e="string"==typeof t.data,o={};if(e)try{o=JSON.parse(t.data)}catch(t){}else o=t.data;var n="object"===_typeof(o)&&null!==o?o.__tcfapiCall:null;n&&window.__tcfapi(n.command,n.version,(function(o,r){var a={__tcfapiReturn:{returnValue:o,success:r,callId:n.callId}};t&&t.source&&t.source.postMessage&&t.source.postMessage(e?JSON.stringify(a):a,"*")}),n.parameter)}),!1))};"undefined"!=typeof module?module.exports=t:t()}(); dataLayer = dataLayer || []; // Standard GTM initialization - Google Consent Mode handles consent automatically (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+ '>m_auth=hzk0Vc3qFsQYhCrIoHz68A>m_preview=env-1>m_cookies_win=x';f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f); })(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-MWFK8L5J'); ;window.NREUM||(NREUM={});NREUM.init={distributed_tracing:{enabled:true},privacy:{cookies_enabled:true},ajax:{deny_list:["bam.nr-data.net"]}}; ;NREUM.loader_config={accountID:"438030",trustKey:"438030",agentID:"772317073",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073"} ;NREUM.info={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073",sa:1} ;/*! For license information please see nr-loader-spa-1.236.0.min.js.LICENSE.txt */ (()=>{"use strict";var e,t,r={5763:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P_:()=>l,Mt:()=>g,C5:()=>s,DL:()=>v,OP:()=>T,lF:()=>D,Yu:()=>y,Dg:()=>h,CX:()=>c,GE:()=>b,sU:()=>_});var n=r(8632),i=r(9567);const o={beacon:n.ce.beacon,errorBeacon:n.ce.errorBeacon,licenseKey:void 0,applicationID:void 0,sa:void 0,queueTime:void 0,applicationTime:void 0,ttGuid:void 0,user:void 0,account:void 0,product:void 0,extra:void 0,jsAttributes:{},userAttributes:void 0,atts:void 0,transactionName:void 0,tNamePlain:void 0},a={};function s(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");if(!a[e])throw new Error("Info for ".concat(e," was never set"));return a[e]}function c(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");a[e]=(0,i.D)(t,o),(0,n.Qy)(e,a[e],"info")}var u=r(7056);const d=()=>{const e={blockSelector:"[data-nr-block]",maskInputOptions:{password:!0}};return{allow_bfcache:!0,privacy:{cookies_enabled:!0},ajax:{deny_list:void 0,enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},distributed_tracing:{enabled:void 0,exclude_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_tracecontext_headers:void 0,allowed_origins:void 0},session:{domain:void 0,expiresMs:u.oD,inactiveMs:u.Hb},ssl:void 0,obfuscate:void 0,jserrors:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},metrics:{enabled:!0},page_action:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30},page_view_event:{enabled:!0},page_view_timing:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30,long_task:!1},session_trace:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},harvest:{tooManyRequestsDelay:60},session_replay:{enabled:!1,harvestTimeSeconds:60,sampleRate:.1,errorSampleRate:.1,maskTextSelector:"*",maskAllInputs:!0,get blockClass(){return"nr-block"},get ignoreClass(){return"nr-ignore"},get maskTextClass(){return"nr-mask"},get blockSelector(){return e.blockSelector},set blockSelector(t){e.blockSelector+=",".concat(t)},get maskInputOptions(){return e.maskInputOptions},set maskInputOptions(t){e.maskInputOptions={...t,password:!0}}},spa:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10}}},f={};function l(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");if(!f[e])throw new Error("Configuration for ".concat(e," was never set"));return f[e]}function h(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");f[e]=(0,i.D)(t,d()),(0,n.Qy)(e,f[e],"config")}function g(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");var r=l(e);if(r){for(var n=t.split("."),i=0;i {r.d(t,{D:()=>i});var n=r(50);function i(e,t){try{if(!e||"object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires an object as input");if(!t||"object"!=typeof t)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires a model to set its initial properties");const r=Object.create(Object.getPrototypeOf(t),Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptors(t)),o=0===Object.keys(r).length?e:r;for(let a in o)if(void 0!==e[a])try{"object"==typeof e[a]&&"object"==typeof t[a]?r[a]=i(e[a],t[a]):r[a]=e[a]}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occurred while setting a property of a Configurable",e)}return r}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting a Configurable",e)}}},6818:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Re:()=>i,gF:()=>o,q4:()=>n});const n="1.236.0",i="PROD",o="CDN"},385:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{FN:()=>a,IF:()=>u,Nk:()=>f,Tt:()=>s,_A:()=>o,il:()=>n,pL:()=>c,v6:()=>i,w1:()=>d});const n="undefined"!=typeof window&&!!window.document,i="undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator),o=n?window:"undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis),a=""+o?.location,s=/iPad|iPhone|iPod/.test(navigator.userAgent),c=s&&"undefined"==typeof SharedWorker,u=(()=>{const e=navigator.userAgent.match(/Firefox[/\s](\d+\.\d+)/);return Array.isArray(e)&&e.length>=2?+e[1]:0})(),d=Boolean(n&&window.document.documentMode),f=!!navigator.sendBeacon},1117:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{w:()=>o});var n=r(50);const i={agentIdentifier:"",ee:void 0};class o{constructor(e){try{if("object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("shared context requires an object as input");this.sharedContext={},Object.assign(this.sharedContext,i),Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,r]=e;Object.keys(i).includes(t)&&(this.sharedContext[t]=r)}))}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting SharedContext",e)}}}},8e3:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{L:()=>d,R:()=>c});var n=r(2177),i=r(1284),o=r(4322),a=r(3325);const s={};function c(e,t){const r={staged:!1,priority:a.p[t]||0};u(e),s[e].get(t)||s[e].set(t,r)}function u(e){e&&(s[e]||(s[e]=new Map))}function d(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:"",t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:"feature";if(u(e),!e||!s[e].get(t))return a(t);s[e].get(t).staged=!0;const r=[...s[e]];function a(t){const r=e?n.ee.get(e):n.ee,a=o.X.handlers;if(r.backlog&&a){var s=r.backlog[t],c=a[t];if(c){for(var u=0;s&&u {let[t,r]=e;return r.staged}))&&(r.sort(((e,t)=>e[1].priority-t[1].priority)),r.forEach((e=>{let[t]=e;a(t)})))}function f(e,t){var r=e[1];(0,i.D)(t[r],(function(t,r){var n=e[0];if(r[0]===n){var i=r[1],o=e[3],a=e[2];i.apply(o,a)}}))}},2177:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{c:()=>f,ee:()=>u});var n=r(8632),i=r(2210),o=r(1284),a=r(5763),s="nr@context";let c=(0,n.fP)();var u;function d(){}function f(e){return(0,i.X)(e,s,l)}function l(){return new d}function h(){u.aborted=!0,u.backlog={}}c.ee?u=c.ee:(u=function e(t,r){var n={},c={},f={},g=!1;try{g=16===r.length&&(0,a.OP)(r).isolatedBacklog}catch(e){}var p={on:b,addEventListener:b,removeEventListener:y,emit:v,get:x,listeners:w,context:m,buffer:A,abort:h,aborted:!1,isBuffering:E,debugId:r,backlog:g?{}:t&&"object"==typeof t.backlog?t.backlog:{}};return p;function m(e){return e&&e instanceof d?e:e?(0,i.X)(e,s,l):l()}function v(e,r,n,i,o){if(!1!==o&&(o=!0),!u.aborted||i){t&&o&&t.emit(e,r,n);for(var a=m(n),s=w(e),d=s.length,f=0;fn,p:()=>i});var n=r(2177).ee.get("handle");function i(e,t,r,i,o){o?(o.buffer([e],i),o.emit(e,t,r)):(n.buffer([e],i),n.emit(e,t,r))}},4322:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>o});var n=r(5546);o.on=a;var i=o.handlers={};function o(e,t,r,o){a(o||n.E,i,e,t,r)}function a(e,t,r,i,o){o||(o="feature"),e||(e=n.E);var a=t[o]=t[o]||{};(a[r]=a[r]||[]).push([e,i])}},3239:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{bP:()=>s,iz:()=>c,m$:()=>a});var n=r(385);let i=!1,o=!1;try{const e={get passive(){return i=!0,!1},get signal(){return o=!0,!1}};n._A.addEventListener("test",null,e),n._A.removeEventListener("test",null,e)}catch(e){}function a(e,t){return i||o?{capture:!!e,passive:i,signal:t}:!!e}function s(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;window.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}function c(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;document.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}},4402:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Ht:()=>u,M:()=>c,Rl:()=>a,ky:()=>s});var n=r(385);const i="xxxxxxxx-xxxx-4xxx-yxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx";function o(e,t){return e?15&e[t]:16*Math.random()|0}function a(){const e=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let t,r=0;return e&&e.getRandomValues&&(t=e.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31))),i.split("").map((e=>"x"===e?o(t,++r).toString(16):"y"===e?(3&o()|8).toString(16):e)).join("")}function s(e){const t=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let r,i=0;t&&t.getRandomValues&&(r=t.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31)));const a=[];for(var s=0;s {r.d(t,{Bq:()=>n,Hb:()=>o,oD:()=>i});const n="NRBA",i=144e5,o=18e5},7894:(e,t,r)=>{function n(){return Math.round(performance.now())}r.d(t,{z:()=>n})},7243:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{e:()=>o});var n=r(385),i={};function o(e){if(e in i)return i[e];if(0===(e||"").indexOf("data:"))return{protocol:"data"};let t;var r=n._A?.location,o={};if(n.il)t=document.createElement("a"),t.href=e;else try{t=new URL(e,r.href)}catch(e){return o}o.port=t.port;var a=t.href.split("://");!o.port&&a[1]&&(o.port=a[1].split("/")[0].split("@").pop().split(":")[1]),o.port&&"0"!==o.port||(o.port="https"===a[0]?"443":"80"),o.hostname=t.hostname||r.hostname,o.pathname=t.pathname,o.protocol=a[0],"/"!==o.pathname.charAt(0)&&(o.pathname="/"+o.pathname);var s=!t.protocol||":"===t.protocol||t.protocol===r.protocol,c=t.hostname===r.hostname&&t.port===r.port;return o.sameOrigin=s&&(!t.hostname||c),"/"===o.pathname&&(i[e]=o),o}},50:(e,t,r)=>{function n(e,t){"function"==typeof console.warn&&(console.warn("New Relic: ".concat(e)),t&&console.warn(t))}r.d(t,{Z:()=>n})},2587:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>c,T:()=>u});var n=r(2177),i=r(5546),o=r(8e3),a=r(3325);const s={stn:[a.D.sessionTrace],err:[a.D.jserrors,a.D.metrics],ins:[a.D.pageAction],spa:[a.D.spa],sr:[a.D.sessionReplay,a.D.sessionTrace]};function c(e,t){const r=n.ee.get(t);e&&"object"==typeof e&&(Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,n]=e;void 0===u[t]&&(s[t]?s[t].forEach((e=>{n?(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,e,r):(0,i.p)("block-"+t,[],void 0,e,r),(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+t,[Boolean(n)],void 0,e,r)})):n&&(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,void 0,r),u[t]=Boolean(n))})),Object.keys(s).forEach((e=>{void 0===u[e]&&(s[e]?.forEach((t=>(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+e,[!1],void 0,t,r))),u[e]=!1)})),(0,o.L)(t,a.D.pageViewEvent))}const u={}},2210:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>i});var n=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty;function i(e,t,r){if(n.call(e,t))return e[t];var i=r();if(Object.defineProperty&&Object.keys)try{return Object.defineProperty(e,t,{value:i,writable:!0,enumerable:!1}),i}catch(e){}return e[t]=i,i}},1284:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n});const n=(e,t)=>Object.entries(e||{}).map((e=>{let[r,n]=e;return t(r,n)}))},4351:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P:()=>o});var n=r(2177);const i=()=>{const e=new WeakSet;return(t,r)=>{if("object"==typeof r&&null!==r){if(e.has(r))return;e.add(r)}return r}};function o(e){try{return JSON.stringify(e,i())}catch(e){try{n.ee.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}}},3960:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{K:()=>a,b:()=>o});var n=r(3239);function i(){return"undefined"==typeof document||"complete"===document.readyState}function o(e,t){if(i())return e();(0,n.bP)("load",e,t)}function a(e){if(i())return e();(0,n.iz)("DOMContentLoaded",e)}},8632:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{EZ:()=>u,Qy:()=>c,ce:()=>o,fP:()=>a,gG:()=>d,mF:()=>s});var n=r(7894),i=r(385);const o={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net"};function a(){return i._A.NREUM||(i._A.NREUM={}),void 0===i._A.newrelic&&(i._A.newrelic=i._A.NREUM),i._A.NREUM}function s(){let e=a();return e.o||(e.o={ST:i._A.setTimeout,SI:i._A.setImmediate,CT:i._A.clearTimeout,XHR:i._A.XMLHttpRequest,REQ:i._A.Request,EV:i._A.Event,PR:i._A.Promise,MO:i._A.MutationObserver,FETCH:i._A.fetch}),e}function c(e,t,r){let i=a();const o=i.initializedAgents||{},s=o[e]||{};return Object.keys(s).length||(s.initializedAt={ms:(0,n.z)(),date:new Date}),i.initializedAgents={...o,[e]:{...s,[r]:t}},i}function u(e,t){a()[e]=t}function d(){return function(){let e=a();const t=e.info||{};e.info={beacon:o.beacon,errorBeacon:o.errorBeacon,...t}}(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.init||{};e.init={...t}}(),s(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.loader_config||{};e.loader_config={...t}}(),a()}},7956:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>i});var n=r(3239);function i(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]&&arguments[1],r=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,i=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;return void(0,n.iz)("visibilitychange",(function(){if(t)return void("hidden"==document.visibilityState&&e());e(document.visibilityState)}),r,i)}},1214:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{em:()=>v,u5:()=>N,QU:()=>S,_L:()=>I,Gm:()=>L,Lg:()=>M,gy:()=>U,BV:()=>Q,Kf:()=>ee});var n=r(2177);const i="nr@original";var o=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty,a=!1;function s(e,t){return e||(e=n.ee),r.inPlace=function(e,t,n,i,o){n||(n="");var a,s,c,u="-"===n.charAt(0);for(c=0;c 2?n-2:0),o=2;o {r(A[T],e,w),r(E[T],e,w)})),r(l._A,"fetch",y),t.on(y+"end",(function(e,r){var n=this;if(r){var i=r.headers.get("content-length");null!==i&&(n.rxSize=i),t.emit(y+"done",[null,r],n)}else t.emit(y+"done",[e],n)})),t}const O={},j=["pushState","replaceState"];function S(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("history")}(e);return!l.il||O[t.debugId]++||(O[t.debugId]=1,s(t).inPlace(window.history,j,"-")),t}var P=r(3239);const C={},R=["appendChild","insertBefore","replaceChild"];function I(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("jsonp")}(e);if(!l.il||C[t.debugId])return t;C[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=/[?&](?:callback|cb)=([^&#]+)/,o=/(.*)\.([^.]+)/,a=/^(\w+)(\.|$)(.*)$/;function c(e,t){var r=e.match(a),n=r[1],i=r[3];return i?c(i,t[n]):t[n]}return r.inPlace(Node.prototype,R,"dom-"),t.on("dom-start",(function(e){!function(e){if(!e||"string"!=typeof e.nodeName||"script"!==e.nodeName.toLowerCase())return;if("function"!=typeof e.addEventListener)return;var n=(a=e.src,s=a.match(i),s?s[1]:null);var a,s;if(!n)return;var u=function(e){var t=e.match(o);if(t&&t.length>=3)return{key:t[2],parent:c(t[1],window)};return{key:e,parent:window}}(n);if("function"!=typeof u.parent[u.key])return;var d={};function f(){t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}function l(){t.emit("jsonp-error",[],d),t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}r.inPlace(u.parent,[u.key],"cb-",d),e.addEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.addEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1)),t.emit("new-jsonp",[e.src],d)}(e[0])})),t}var k=r(5763);const H={};function L(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("mutation")}(e);if(!l.il||H[t.debugId])return t;H[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=k.Yu.MO;return i&&(window.MutationObserver=function(e){return this instanceof i?new i(r(e,"fn-")):i.apply(this,arguments)},MutationObserver.prototype=i.prototype),t}const z={};function M(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("promise")}(e);if(z[t.debugId])return t;z[t.debugId]=!0;var r=n.c,o=s(t),a=k.Yu.PR;return a&&function(){function e(r){var n=t.context(),i=o(r,"executor-",n,null,!1);const s=Reflect.construct(a,[i],e);return t.context(s).getCtx=function(){return n},s}l._A.Promise=e,Object.defineProperty(e,"name",{value:"Promise"}),e.toString=function(){return a.toString()},Object.setPrototypeOf(e,a),["all","race"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){let i=!1;[...e||[]].forEach((e=>{this.resolve(e).then(a("all"===r),a(!1))}));const o=n.apply(this,arguments);return o;function a(e){return function(){t.emit("propagate",[null,!i],o,!1,!1),i=i||!e}}}})),["resolve","reject"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){const r=n.apply(this,arguments);return e!==r&&t.emit("propagate",[e,!0],r,!1,!1),r}})),e.prototype=a.prototype;const n=a.prototype.then;a.prototype.then=function(){var e=this,i=r(e);i.promise=e;for(var a=arguments.length,s=new Array(a),c=0;c e())),t};function m(e,t){i.inPlace(t,["onreadystatechange"],"fn-",E)}function b(){var e=this,t=r.context(e);e.readyState>3&&!t.resolved&&(t.resolved=!0,r.emit("xhr-resolved",[],e)),i.inPlace(e,f,"fn-",E)}if(function(e,t){for(var r in e)t[r]=e[r]}(o,p),p.prototype=o.prototype,i.inPlace(p.prototype,J,"-xhr-",E),r.on("send-xhr-start",(function(e,t){m(e,t),function(e){h.push(e),a&&(y?y.then(A):u?u(A):(w=-w,x.data=w))}(t)})),r.on("open-xhr-start",m),a){var y=c&&c.resolve();if(!u&&!c){var w=1,x=document.createTextNode(w);new a(A).observe(x,{characterData:!0})}}else t.on("fn-end",(function(e){e[0]&&e[0].type===d||A()}));function A(){for(var e=0;e {r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.ajax},6660:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{A:()=>i,t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.jserrors,i="nr@seenError"},3081:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{gF:()=>o,mY:()=>i,t9:()=>n,vz:()=>s,xS:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.metrics,i="sm",o="cm",a="storeSupportabilityMetrics",s="storeEventMetrics"},4649:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageAction},7633:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Dz:()=>i,OJ:()=>a,qw:()=>o,t9:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewEvent,i="firstbyte",o="domcontent",a="windowload"},9251:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewTiming},3614:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BST_RESOURCE:()=>i,END:()=>s,FEATURE_NAME:()=>n,FN_END:()=>u,FN_START:()=>c,PUSH_STATE:()=>d,RESOURCE:()=>o,START:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.sessionTrace,i="bstResource",o="resource",a="-start",s="-end",c="fn"+a,u="fn"+s,d="pushState"},7836:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BODY:()=>A,CB_END:()=>E,CB_START:()=>u,END:()=>x,FEATURE_NAME:()=>i,FETCH:()=>_,FETCH_BODY:()=>v,FETCH_DONE:()=>m,FETCH_START:()=>p,FN_END:()=>c,FN_START:()=>s,INTERACTION:()=>l,INTERACTION_API:()=>d,INTERACTION_EVENTS:()=>o,JSONP_END:()=>b,JSONP_NODE:()=>g,JS_TIME:()=>T,MAX_TIMER_BUDGET:()=>a,REMAINING:()=>f,SPA_NODE:()=>h,START:()=>w,originalSetTimeout:()=>y});var n=r(5763);const i=r(3325).D.spa,o=["click","submit","keypress","keydown","keyup","change"],a=999,s="fn-start",c="fn-end",u="cb-start",d="api-ixn-",f="remaining",l="interaction",h="spaNode",g="jsonpNode",p="fetch-start",m="fetch-done",v="fetch-body-",b="jsonp-end",y=n.Yu.ST,w="-start",x="-end",A="-body",E="cb"+x,T="jsTime",_="fetch"},5938:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{W:()=>o});var n=r(5763),i=r(2177);class o{constructor(e,t,r){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.aggregator=t,this.ee=i.ee.get(e,(0,n.OP)(this.agentIdentifier).isolatedBacklog),this.featureName=r,this.blocked=!1}}},9144:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{j:()=>m});var n=r(3325),i=r(5763),o=r(5546),a=r(2177),s=r(7894),c=r(8e3),u=r(3960),d=r(385),f=r(50),l=r(3081),h=r(8632);function g(){const e=(0,h.gG)();["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease","addPageAction","setCurrentRouteName","setPageViewName","setCustomAttribute","interaction","noticeError","setUserId"].forEach((t=>{e[t]=function(){for(var r=arguments.length,n=new Array(r),i=0;i 1?r-1:0),i=1;i {e.exposed&&e.api[t]&&o.push(e.api[t](...n))})),o.length>1?o:o[0]}(t,...n)}}))}var p=r(2587);function m(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:{},m=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,v=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0,{init:b,info:y,loader_config:w,runtime:x={loaderType:m},exposed:A=!0}=t;const E=(0,h.gG)();y||(b=E.init,y=E.info,w=E.loader_config),(0,i.Dg)(e,b||{}),(0,i.GE)(e,w||{}),(0,i.sU)(e,x),y.jsAttributes??={},d.v6&&(y.jsAttributes.isWorker=!0),(0,i.CX)(e,y),g();const T=function(e,t){t||(0,c.R)(e,"api");const h={};var g=a.ee.get(e),p=g.get("tracer"),m="api-",v=m+"ixn-";function b(t,r,n,o){const a=(0,i.C5)(e);return null===r?delete a.jsAttributes[t]:(0,i.CX)(e,{...a,jsAttributes:{...a.jsAttributes,[t]:r}}),x(m,n,!0,o||null===r?"session":void 0)(t,r)}function y(){}["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease"].forEach((e=>h[e]=x(m,e,!0,"api"))),h.addPageAction=x(m,"addPageAction",!0,n.D.pageAction),h.setCurrentRouteName=x(m,"routeName",!0,n.D.spa),h.setPageViewName=function(t,r){if("string"==typeof t)return"/"!==t.charAt(0)&&(t="/"+t),(0,i.OP)(e).customTransaction=(r||"http://custom.transaction")+t,x(m,"setPageViewName",!0)()},h.setCustomAttribute=function(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2];if("string"==typeof e){if(["string","number"].includes(typeof t)||null===t)return b(e,t,"setCustomAttribute",r);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nNon-null value must be a string or number type, but a type of was provided."))}else(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nName must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.setUserId=function(e){if("string"==typeof e||null===e)return b("enduser.id",e,"setUserId",!0);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setUserId.\nNon-null value must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.interaction=function(){return(new y).get()};var w=y.prototype={createTracer:function(e,t){var r={},i=this,a="function"==typeof t;return(0,o.p)(v+"tracer",[(0,s.z)(),e,r],i,n.D.spa,g),function(){if(p.emit((a?"":"no-")+"fn-start",[(0,s.z)(),i,a],r),a)try{return t.apply(this,arguments)}catch(e){throw p.emit("fn-err",[arguments,this,"string"==typeof e?new Error(e):e],r),e}finally{p.emit("fn-end",[(0,s.z)()],r)}}}};function x(e,t,r,i){return function(){return(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/"+t+"/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),i&&(0,o.p)(e+t,[(0,s.z)(),...arguments],r?null:this,i,g),r?void 0:this}}function A(){r.e(439).then(r.bind(r,7438)).then((t=>{let{setAPI:r}=t;r(e),(0,c.L)(e,"api")})).catch((()=>(0,f.Z)("Downloading runtime APIs failed...")))}return["actionText","setName","setAttribute","save","ignore","onEnd","getContext","end","get"].forEach((e=>{w[e]=x(v,e,void 0,n.D.spa)})),h.noticeError=function(e,t){"string"==typeof e&&(e=new Error(e)),(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/noticeError/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),(0,o.p)("err",[e,(0,s.z)(),!1,t],void 0,n.D.jserrors,g)},d.il?(0,u.b)((()=>A()),!0):A(),h}(e,v);return(0,h.Qy)(e,T,"api"),(0,h.Qy)(e,A,"exposed"),(0,h.EZ)("activatedFeatures",p.T),T}},3325:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n,p:()=>i});const n={ajax:"ajax",jserrors:"jserrors",metrics:"metrics",pageAction:"page_action",pageViewEvent:"page_view_event",pageViewTiming:"page_view_timing",sessionReplay:"session_replay",sessionTrace:"session_trace",spa:"spa"},i={[n.pageViewEvent]:1,[n.pageViewTiming]:2,[n.metrics]:3,[n.jserrors]:4,[n.ajax]:5,[n.sessionTrace]:6,[n.pageAction]:7,[n.spa]:8,[n.sessionReplay]:9}}},n={};function i(e){var t=n[e];if(void 0!==t)return t.exports;var o=n[e]={exports:{}};return r[e](o,o.exports,i),o.exports}i.m=r,i.d=(e,t)=>{for(var r in t)i.o(t,r)&&!i.o(e,r)&&Object.defineProperty(e,r,{enumerable:!0,get:t[r]})},i.f={},i.e=e=>Promise.all(Object.keys(i.f).reduce(((t,r)=>(i.f[r](e,t),t)),[])),i.u=e=>(({78:"page_action-aggregate",147:"metrics-aggregate",242:"session-manager",317:"jserrors-aggregate",348:"page_view_timing-aggregate",412:"lazy-feature-loader",439:"async-api",538:"recorder",590:"session_replay-aggregate",675:"compressor",733:"session_trace-aggregate",786:"page_view_event-aggregate",873:"spa-aggregate",898:"ajax-aggregate"}[e]||e)+"."+{78:"ac76d497",147:"3dc53903",148:"1a20d5fe",242:"2a64278a",317:"49e41428",348:"bd6de33a",412:"2f55ce66",439:"30bd804e",538:"1b18459f",590:"cf0efb30",675:"ae9f91a8",733:"83105561",786:"06482edd",860:"03a8b7a5",873:"e6b09d52",898:"998ef92b"}[e]+"-1.236.0.min.js"),i.o=(e,t)=>Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(e,t),e={},t="NRBA:",i.l=(r,n,o,a)=>{if(e[r])e[r].push(n);else{var s,c;if(void 0!==o)for(var u=document.getElementsByTagName("script"),d=0;d {s.onerror=s.onload=null,clearTimeout(h);var i=e[r];if(delete e[r],s.parentNode&&s.parentNode.removeChild(s),i&&i.forEach((e=>e(n))),t)return t(n)},h=setTimeout(l.bind(null,void 0,{type:"timeout",target:s}),12e4);s.onerror=l.bind(null,s.onerror),s.onload=l.bind(null,s.onload),c&&document.head.appendChild(s)}},i.r=e=>{"undefined"!=typeof Symbol&&Symbol.toStringTag&&Object.defineProperty(e,Symbol.toStringTag,{value:"Module"}),Object.defineProperty(e,"__esModule",{value:!0})},i.j=364,i.p="https://js-agent.newrelic.com/",(()=>{var e={364:0,953:0};i.f.j=(t,r)=>{var n=i.o(e,t)?e[t]:void 0;if(0!==n)if(n)r.push(n[2]);else{var o=new Promise(((r,i)=>n=e[t]=[r,i]));r.push(n[2]=o);var a=i.p+i.u(t),s=new Error;i.l(a,(r=>{if(i.o(e,t)&&(0!==(n=e[t])&&(e[t]=void 0),n)){var o=r&&("load"===r.type?"missing":r.type),a=r&&r.target&&r.target.src;s.message="Loading chunk "+t+" failed.\n("+o+": "+a+")",s.name="ChunkLoadError",s.type=o,s.request=a,n[1](s)}}),"chunk-"+t,t)}};var t=(t,r)=>{var n,o,[a,s,c]=r,u=0;if(a.some((t=>0!==e[t]))){for(n in s)i.o(s,n)&&(i.m[n]=s[n]);if(c)c(i)}for(t&&t(r);u {i.r(o);var e=i(3325),t=i(5763);const r=Object.values(e.D);function n(e){const n={};return r.forEach((r=>{n[r]=function(e,r){return!1!==(0,t.Mt)(r,"".concat(e,".enabled"))}(r,e)})),n}var a=i(9144);var s=i(5546),c=i(385),u=i(8e3),d=i(5938),f=i(3960),l=i(50);class h extends d.W{constructor(e,t,r){let n=!(arguments.length>3&&void 0!==arguments[3])||arguments[3];super(e,t,r),this.auto=n,this.abortHandler,this.featAggregate,this.onAggregateImported,n&&(0,u.R)(e,r)}importAggregator(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:{};if(this.featAggregate||!this.auto)return;const r=c.il&&!0===(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"privacy.cookies_enabled");let n;this.onAggregateImported=new Promise((e=>{n=e}));const o=async()=>{let t;try{if(r){const{setupAgentSession:e}=await Promise.all([i.e(860),i.e(242)]).then(i.bind(i,3228));t=e(this.agentIdentifier)}}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("A problem occurred when starting up session manager. This page will not start or extend any session.",e)}try{if(!this.shouldImportAgg(this.featureName,t))return void(0,u.L)(this.agentIdentifier,this.featureName);const{lazyFeatureLoader:r}=await i.e(412).then(i.bind(i,8582)),{Aggregate:o}=await r(this.featureName,"aggregate");this.featAggregate=new o(this.agentIdentifier,this.aggregator,e),n(!0)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Downloading and initializing ".concat(this.featureName," failed..."),e),this.abortHandler?.(),n(!1)}};c.il?(0,f.b)((()=>o()),!0):o()}shouldImportAgg(r,n){return r!==e.D.sessionReplay||!1!==(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"session_trace.enabled")&&(!!n?.isNew||!!n?.state.sessionReplay)}}var g=i(7633),p=i(7894);class m extends h{static featureName=g.t9;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];if(super(r,n,g.t9,i),("undefined"==typeof PerformanceNavigationTiming||c.Tt)&&"undefined"!=typeof PerformanceTiming){const n=(0,t.OP)(r);n[g.Dz]=Math.max(Date.now()-n.offset,0),(0,f.K)((()=>n[g.qw]=Math.max((0,p.z)()-n[g.Dz],0))),(0,f.b)((()=>{const t=(0,p.z)();n[g.OJ]=Math.max(t-n[g.Dz],0),(0,s.p)("timing",["load",t],void 0,e.D.pageViewTiming,this.ee)}))}this.importAggregator()}}var v=i(1117),b=i(1284);class y extends v.w{constructor(e){super(e),this.aggregatedData={}}store(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,r,i);return o.metrics=function(e,t){t||(t={count:0});return t.count+=1,(0,b.D)(e,(function(e,r){t[e]=w(r,t[e])})),t}(n,o.metrics),o}merge(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,n,i);if(o.metrics){var a=o.metrics;a.count+=r.count,(0,b.D)(r,(function(e,t){if("count"!==e){var n=a[e],i=r[e];i&&!i.c?a[e]=w(i.t,n):a[e]=function(e,t){if(!t)return e;t.c||(t=x(t.t));return t.min=Math.min(e.min,t.min),t.max=Math.max(e.max,t.max),t.t+=e.t,t.sos+=e.sos,t.c+=e.c,t}(i,a[e])}}))}else o.metrics=r}storeMetric(e,t,r,n){var i=this.getBucket(e,t,r);return i.stats=w(n,i.stats),i}getBucket(e,t,r,n){this.aggregatedData[e]||(this.aggregatedData[e]={});var i=this.aggregatedData[e][t];return i||(i=this.aggregatedData[e][t]={params:r||{}},n&&(i.custom=n)),i}get(e,t){return t?this.aggregatedData[e]&&this.aggregatedData[e][t]:this.aggregatedData[e]}take(e){for(var t={},r="",n=!1,i=0;i t.max&&(t.max=e),e 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,r,j.t,n),c.il&&((0,t.OP)(e).initHidden=Boolean("hidden"===document.visibilityState),(0,N.N)((()=>(0,s.p)("docHidden",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee)),!0),(0,O.bP)("pagehide",(()=>(0,s.p)("winPagehide",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee))),this.importAggregator())}}var P=i(3081);class C extends h{static featureName=P.t9;constructor(e,t){let r=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,P.t9,r),this.importAggregator()}}var R,I=i(2210),k=i(1214),H=i(2177),L={};try{R=localStorage.getItem("__nr_flags").split(","),console&&"function"==typeof console.log&&(L.console=!0,-1!==R.indexOf("dev")&&(L.dev=!0),-1!==R.indexOf("nr_dev")&&(L.nrDev=!0))}catch(e){}function z(e){try{L.console&&z(e)}catch(e){}}L.nrDev&&H.ee.on("internal-error",(function(e){z(e.stack)})),L.dev&&H.ee.on("fn-err",(function(e,t,r){z(r.stack)})),L.dev&&(z("NR AGENT IN DEVELOPMENT MODE"),z("flags: "+(0,b.D)(L,(function(e,t){return e})).join(", ")));var M=i(6660);class B extends h{static featureName=M.t;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,M.t,i),this.skipNext=0;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}const o=this;o.ee.on("fn-start",(function(e,t,r){o.abortHandler&&(o.skipNext+=1)})),o.ee.on("fn-err",(function(t,r,n){o.abortHandler&&!n[M.A]&&((0,I.X)(n,M.A,(function(){return!0})),this.thrown=!0,(0,s.p)("err",[n,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee))})),o.ee.on("fn-end",(function(){o.abortHandler&&!this.thrown&&o.skipNext>0&&(o.skipNext-=1)})),o.ee.on("internal-error",(function(t){(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee)})),this.origOnerror=c._A.onerror,c._A.onerror=this.onerrorHandler.bind(this),c._A.addEventListener("unhandledrejection",(t=>{const r=function(e){let t="Unhandled Promise Rejection: ";if(e instanceof Error)try{return e.message=t+e.message,e}catch(t){return e}if(void 0===e)return new Error(t);try{return new Error(t+(0,D.P)(e))}catch(e){return new Error(t)}}(t.reason);(0,s.p)("err",[r,(0,p.z)(),!1,{unhandledPromiseRejection:1}],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}),(0,O.m$)(!1,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),(0,k.gy)(this.ee),(0,k.BV)(this.ee),(0,k.em)(this.ee),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}onerrorHandler(t,r,n,i,o){"function"==typeof this.origOnerror&&this.origOnerror(...arguments);try{this.skipNext?this.skipNext-=1:(0,s.p)("err",[o||new F(t,r,n),(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(t){try{(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(e){}}return!1}}function F(e,t,r){this.message=e||"Uncaught error with no additional information",this.sourceURL=t,this.line=r}let U=1;const q="nr@id";function G(e){const t=typeof e;return!e||"object"!==t&&"function"!==t?-1:e===c._A?0:(0,I.X)(e,q,(function(){return U++}))}function V(e){if("string"==typeof e&&e.length)return e.length;if("object"==typeof e){if("undefined"!=typeof ArrayBuffer&&e instanceof ArrayBuffer&&e.byteLength)return e.byteLength;if("undefined"!=typeof Blob&&e instanceof Blob&&e.size)return e.size;if(!("undefined"!=typeof FormData&&e instanceof FormData))try{return(0,D.P)(e).length}catch(e){return}}}var X=i(7243);class W{constructor(e){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.generateTracePayload=this.generateTracePayload.bind(this),this.shouldGenerateTrace=this.shouldGenerateTrace.bind(this)}generateTracePayload(e){if(!this.shouldGenerateTrace(e))return null;var r=(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier);if(!r)return null;var n=(r.accountID||"").toString()||null,i=(r.agentID||"").toString()||null,o=(r.trustKey||"").toString()||null;if(!n||!i)return null;var a=(0,_.M)(),s=(0,_.Ht)(),c=Date.now(),u={spanId:a,traceId:s,timestamp:c};return(e.sameOrigin||this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useTraceContextHeadersForCors())&&(u.traceContextParentHeader=this.generateTraceContextParentHeader(a,s),u.traceContextStateHeader=this.generateTraceContextStateHeader(a,c,n,i,o)),(e.sameOrigin&&!this.excludeNewrelicHeader()||!e.sameOrigin&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useNewrelicHeaderForCors())&&(u.newrelicHeader=this.generateTraceHeader(a,s,c,n,i,o)),u}generateTraceContextParentHeader(e,t){return"00-"+t+"-"+e+"-01"}generateTraceContextStateHeader(e,t,r,n,i){return i+"@nr=0-1-"+r+"-"+n+"-"+e+"----"+t}generateTraceHeader(e,t,r,n,i,o){if(!("function"==typeof c._A?.btoa))return null;var a={v:[0,1],d:{ty:"Browser",ac:n,ap:i,id:e,tr:t,ti:r}};return o&&n!==o&&(a.d.tk=o),btoa((0,D.P)(a))}shouldGenerateTrace(e){return this.isDtEnabled()&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)}isAllowedOrigin(e){var r=!1,n={};if((0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"distributed_tracing")&&(n=(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier).distributed_tracing),e.sameOrigin)r=!0;else if(n.allowed_origins instanceof Array)for(var i=0;i 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,Z.t,i),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(this.dt=new W(r),this.handler=(e,t,r,n)=>(0,s.p)(e,t,r,n,this.ee),(0,k.u5)(this.ee),(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),function(r,n,i,o){function a(e){var t=this;t.totalCbs=0,t.called=0,t.cbTime=0,t.end=E,t.ended=!1,t.xhrGuids={},t.lastSize=null,t.loadCaptureCalled=!1,t.params=this.params||{},t.metrics=this.metrics||{},e.addEventListener("load",(function(r){_(t,e)}),(0,O.m$)(!1)),c.IF||e.addEventListener("progress",(function(e){t.lastSize=e.loaded}),(0,O.m$)(!1))}function s(e){this.params={method:e[0]},T(this,e[1]),this.metrics={}}function u(e,n){var i=(0,t.DL)(r);i.xpid&&this.sameOrigin&&n.setRequestHeader("X-NewRelic-ID",i.xpid);var a=o.generateTracePayload(this.parsedOrigin);if(a){var s=!1;a.newrelicHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("newrelic",a.newrelicHeader),s=!0),a.traceContextParentHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("traceparent",a.traceContextParentHeader),a.traceContextStateHeader&&n.setRequestHeader("tracestate",a.traceContextStateHeader),s=!0),s&&(this.dt=a)}}function d(e,t){var r=this.metrics,i=e[0],o=this;if(r&&i){var a=V(i);a&&(r.txSize=a)}this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.listener=function(e){try{"abort"!==e.type||o.loadCaptureCalled||(o.params.aborted=!0),("load"!==e.type||o.called===o.totalCbs&&(o.onloadCalled||"function"!=typeof t.onload)&&"function"==typeof o.end)&&o.end(t)}catch(e){try{n.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}};for(var s=0;s 1?e[1]=i:e.push(i)}else e[0]&&e[0].headers&&s(e[0].headers,n)&&(this.dt=n);function s(e,t){var r=!1;return t.newrelicHeader&&(e.set("newrelic",t.newrelicHeader),r=!0),t.traceContextParentHeader&&(e.set("traceparent",t.traceContextParentHeader),t.traceContextStateHeader&&e.set("tracestate",t.traceContextStateHeader),r=!0),r}}function x(e,t){this.params={},this.metrics={},this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.dt=t,e.length>=1&&(this.target=e[0]),e.length>=2&&(this.opts=e[1]);var r,n=this.opts||{},i=this.target;"string"==typeof i?r=i:"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof Y?r=i.url:c._A?.URL&&"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof URL&&(r=i.href),T(this,r);var o=(""+(i&&i instanceof Y&&i.method||n.method||"GET")).toUpperCase();this.params.method=o,this.txSize=V(n.body)||0}function A(t,r){var n;this.endTime=(0,p.z)(),this.params||(this.params={}),this.params.status=r?r.status:0,"string"==typeof this.rxSize&&this.rxSize.length>0&&(n=+this.rxSize);var o={txSize:this.txSize,rxSize:n,duration:(0,p.z)()-this.startTime};i("xhr",[this.params,o,this.startTime,this.endTime,"fetch"],this,e.D.ajax)}function E(t){var r=this.params,n=this.metrics;if(!this.ended){this.ended=!0;for(var o=0;o 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,we.t,r),this.importAggregator()}}new class{constructor(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:(0,_.ky)(16);c._A?(this.agentIdentifier=t,this.sharedAggregator=new y({agentIdentifier:this.agentIdentifier}),this.features={},this.desiredFeatures=new Set(e.features||[]),this.desiredFeatures.add(m),Object.assign(this,(0,a.j)(this.agentIdentifier,e,e.loaderType||"agent")),this.start()):(0,l.Z)("Failed to initial the agent. Could not determine the runtime environment.")}get config(){return{info:(0,t.C5)(this.agentIdentifier),init:(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier),loader_config:(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier),runtime:(0,t.OP)(this.agentIdentifier)}}start(){const t="features";try{const r=n(this.agentIdentifier),i=[...this.desiredFeatures];i.sort(((t,r)=>e.p[t.featureName]-e.p[r.featureName])),i.forEach((t=>{if(r[t.featureName]||t.featureName===e.D.pageViewEvent){const n=function(t){switch(t){case e.D.ajax:return[e.D.jserrors];case e.D.sessionTrace:return[e.D.ajax,e.D.pageViewEvent];case e.D.sessionReplay:return[e.D.sessionTrace];case e.D.pageViewTiming:return[e.D.pageViewEvent];default:return[]}}(t.featureName);n.every((e=>r[e]))||(0,l.Z)("".concat(t.featureName," is enabled but one or more dependent features has been disabled (").concat((0,D.P)(n),"). This may cause unintended consequences or missing data...")),this.features[t.featureName]=new t(this.agentIdentifier,this.sharedAggregator)}})),(0,T.Qy)(this.agentIdentifier,this.features,t)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Failed to initialize all enabled instrument classes (agent aborted) -",e);for(const e in this.features)this.features[e].abortHandler?.();const r=(0,T.fP)();return delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.api,delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.[t],delete this.sharedAggregator,r.ee?.abort(),delete r.ee?.get(this.agentIdentifier),!1}}}({features:[J,m,S,class extends h{static featureName=oe;constructor(t,r){if(super(t,r,oe,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;const n=this.ee;let i;(0,k.QU)(n),this.eventsEE=(0,k.em)(n),this.eventsEE.on(se,(function(e,t){this.bstStart=(0,p.z)()})),this.eventsEE.on(ae,(function(t,r){(0,s.p)("bst",[t[0],r,this.bstStart,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),n.on(ce+ne,(function(e){this.time=(0,p.z)(),this.startPath=location.pathname+location.hash})),n.on(ce+ie,(function(t){(0,s.p)("bstHist",[location.pathname+location.hash,this.startPath,this.time],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)}));try{i=new PerformanceObserver((t=>{const r=t.getEntries();(0,s.p)(te,[r],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),i.observe({type:re,buffered:!0})}catch(e){}this.importAggregator({resourceObserver:i})}},C,xe,B,class extends h{static featureName=de;constructor(e,r){if(super(e,r,de,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;if(!(0,t.OP)(e).xhrWrappable)return;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}let n,i=0;const o=this.ee.get("tracer"),a=(0,k._L)(this.ee),s=(0,k.Lg)(this.ee),u=(0,k.BV)(this.ee),d=(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),f=this.ee.get("events"),l=(0,k.u5)(this.ee),h=(0,k.QU)(this.ee),g=(0,k.Gm)(this.ee);function m(e,t){h.emit("newURL",[""+window.location,t])}function v(){i++,n=window.location.hash,this[ve]=(0,p.z)()}function b(){i--,window.location.hash!==n&&m(0,!0);var e=(0,p.z)();this[pe]=~~this[pe]+e-this[ve],this[ye]=e}function y(e,t){e.on(t,(function(){this[t]=(0,p.z)()}))}this.ee.on(ve,v),s.on(be,v),a.on(be,v),this.ee.on(ye,b),s.on(ge,b),a.on(ge,b),this.ee.buffer([ve,ye,"xhr-resolved"],this.featureName),f.buffer([ve],this.featureName),u.buffer(["setTimeout"+le,"clearTimeout"+fe,ve],this.featureName),d.buffer([ve,"new-xhr","send-xhr"+fe],this.featureName),l.buffer([me+fe,me+"-done",me+he+fe,me+he+le],this.featureName),h.buffer(["newURL"],this.featureName),g.buffer([ve],this.featureName),s.buffer(["propagate",be,ge,"executor-err","resolve"+fe],this.featureName),o.buffer([ve,"no-"+ve],this.featureName),a.buffer(["new-jsonp","cb-start","jsonp-error","jsonp-end"],this.featureName),y(l,me+fe),y(l,me+"-done"),y(a,"new-jsonp"),y(a,"jsonp-end"),y(a,"cb-start"),h.on("pushState-end",m),h.on("replaceState-end",m),window.addEventListener("hashchange",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("load",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("popstate",(function(){m(0,i>1)}),(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}}],loaderType:"spa"})})(),window.NRBA=o})(); window.jQuery || document.write(' ') CKEDITOR_BASEPATH='https://f1000research.com/js/vendor/ckeditor/' window.reactTheme = 'research'; window.MathJax = { CommonHTML: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, 'HTML-CSS': { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, SVG: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, AuthorInit: function() { MathJax.Hub.Register.MessageHook('End Process', function () { let timeout = false; // holder for timeout id const delay = 250; // delay after event is "complete" to run callback const reflowMath = function() { const dispFormulas = document.querySelectorAll('.disp-formula.panel'); if (!dispFormulas) { return; } for (const dispFormula of dispFormulas) { const child = dispFormula.querySelector('.MathJax_Preview').nextSibling.firstChild; const isMultiline = MathJax.Hub.getAllJax(dispFormula)[0].root.isMultiline; if (dispFormula.offsetWidth < child.offsetWidth || isMultiline) { MathJax.Hub.Queue(['Rerender', MathJax.Hub, dispFormula]); } } }; window.addEventListener('resize', function() { clearTimeout(timeout); // clear the timeout timeout = setTimeout(reflowMath, delay); // start timing for event "completion" }); }); }, }; if (window.location.hash == '#_=_'){ window.location = window.location.href.split('#')[0] } !function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s){if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function() {n.callMethod? n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)} ;if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n; n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version='2.0';n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0; t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,'script','https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/fbevents.js'); fbq('init', '1641728616063202'); fbq('track', "PixelInitialized", {}); (function(h,o,t,j,a,r){ h.hj=h.hj||function(){(h.hj.q=h.hj.q||[]).push(arguments)}; h._hjSettings={hjid:2318163,hjsv:6}; a=o.getElementsByTagName('head')[0]; r=o.createElement('script');r.async=1; r.src=t+h._hjSettings.hjid+j+h._hjSettings.hjsv; a.appendChild(r); })(window,document,'https://static.hotjar.com/c/hotjar-','.js?sv='); search file_upload Submit your research search menu close search Browse Gateways & Collections How to Publish Submit your Research My Submissions Article Guidelines Article Guidelines (New Versions) Open Data, Software and Code Guidelines Open Data and Accessible Source Materials Guidelines (HSS) Open Data, Software and Code Guidelines (PSE) Prepublication Checks Production Process Posters and Slides Guidelines Document Guidelines Article Processing Charges Peer Review Finding Article Reviewers About How it Works For Reviewers Our Advisors Policies Glossary FAQs For Developers Newsroom Contact My Research Submissions Content and Tracking Alerts My Details Sign In file_upload Submit your research { "@context": "https://schema.org", "@type": "ScholarlyArticle", "mainEntityOfPage": { "@type": "WebPage", "@id": "https://f1000research.com/articles/14-937" }, "headline": "Educating for Complexity: A Bibliometric Analysis of Systems Thinking in 21st-Century Science Education", "datePublished": "2025-09-18T11:49:55", "dateModified": "2026-01-24T12:07:33", "author": [ { "@type": "Person", "name": "Dwi Retno Sari" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Sentot Budi Rahardjo" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Baskoro Adi Prayitno" } ], "publisher": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "F1000Research", "logo": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://f1000research.com/img/AMP/F1000Research_image.png", "height": 480, "width": 60 } }, "image": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://f1000research.com/img/AMP/F1000Research_image.png", "height": 1200, "width": 150 }, "description": "This study analyzed international research on systems thinking in science education from 2014 to 2025. Systems thinking, as it points out the links between parts of complex systems, is being seen as an important skill for managing issues such as climate change, loss of biodiversity, and sustainability. Despite its importance, genetics is introduced differently in education around the world. Using Scopus data, we study the main contributors to this field, emerging research themes, and how different institutions are teaming up, with sustainability, STEM education, and interdisciplinary learning being areas that are gaining importance. This information highlights the need for international research partnerships and support for teachers to teach systems thinking and improve students’ skills to face real-life problems. The results can help improve how policymakers, educators, and researchers introduce systems thinking into classrooms." } { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "BreadcrumbList", "itemListElement": [ { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "1", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/", "name": "Home" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "2", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/browse/articles", "name": "Browse" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "3", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/articles/14-937/v1", "name": "Educating for Complexity: A Bibliometric Analysis of Systems Thinking..." } } ] } Home Browse Educating for Complexity: A Bibliometric Analysis of Systems Thinking... ALL Metrics - Views Downloads Get PDF Get XML Cite How to cite this article Retno Sari D, Budi Rahardjo S and Adi Prayitno B. Educating for Complexity: A Bibliometric Analysis of Systems Thinking in 21st-Century Science Education [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :937 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.168515.1 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. Close Copy Citation Details Export Export Citation Sciwheel EndNote Ref. Manager Bibtex ProCite Sente EXPORT Select a format first Track Share ▬ ✚ Review Educating for Complexity: A Bibliometric Analysis of Systems Thinking in 21st-Century Science Education [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] Dwi Retno Sari 1 , Sentot Budi Rahardjo https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0453-9524 2 , Baskoro Adi Prayitno 3 Dwi Retno Sari 1 , Sentot Budi Rahardjo https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0453-9524 2 , Baskoro Adi Prayitno 3 PUBLISHED 18 Sep 2025 Author details Author details 1 Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Central Java, 57126, Indonesia 2 Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Central Java, 57126, Indonesia 3 Fakultas Keguruan dan Pendidikan, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Central Java, 57126, Indonesia Dwi Retno Sari Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Funding Acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Resources, Software, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Sentot Budi Rahardjo Roles: Investigation, Supervision, Validation, Writing – Review & Editing Baskoro Adi Prayitno Roles: Supervision, Validation, Writing – Review & Editing OPEN PEER REVIEW DETAILS REVIEWER STATUS Abstract This study analyzed international research on systems thinking in science education from 2014 to 2025. Systems thinking, as it points out the links between parts of complex systems, is being seen as an important skill for managing issues such as climate change, loss of biodiversity, and sustainability. Despite its importance, genetics is introduced differently in education around the world. Using Scopus data, we study the main contributors to this field, emerging research themes, and how different institutions are teaming up, with sustainability, STEM education, and interdisciplinary learning being areas that are gaining importance. This information highlights the need for international research partnerships and support for teachers to teach systems thinking and improve students’ skills to face real-life problems. The results can help improve how policymakers, educators, and researchers introduce systems thinking into classrooms. READ ALL READ LESS Keywords Systems Thinking, Science Education, Sustainability, Climate Change, STEM Education Corresponding Author(s) Sentot Budi Rahardjo ( [email protected] ) Close Corresponding author: Sentot Budi Rahardjo Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information: This research was supported by the Indonesian Education Scholarship (BPI), the Center for Higher Education Funding and Assessment (PPAPT), and the Indonesia Endowment Fund for Education (LPDP) with grant number 00929/BPPT/BPI.06/9/2023 The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Copyright: © 2025 Retno Sari D et al . This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. How to cite: Retno Sari D, Budi Rahardjo S and Adi Prayitno B. Educating for Complexity: A Bibliometric Analysis of Systems Thinking in 21st-Century Science Education [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :937 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.168515.1 ) First published: 18 Sep 2025, 14 :937 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.168515.1 ) Latest published: 24 Jan 2026, 14 :937 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.168515.2 )  There is a newer version of this article available. Suppress this message for one day. Introduction In this era, people and societies must deal with problems never seen before, such as climate change, reduced biodiversity, and inequalities ( Nations, 2020 ). The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports that (according to their work) (IPCC, 2023 ), global temperatures are expected to reach 1.5°C above normal by 2030, indicating the urgent need to train students to face multiple challenges. Older educational methods that teach lessons separately do not adequately prepare students for future challenges. As these issues are tied together, education should switch from an old, separated style to one that helps everyone learn how to see the big picture and face real-world challenges ( Bielik et al., 2023 ; E. Bozkurt, 2023 ). A helpful idea for tackling this problem is systems thinking, which allows learners to observe relationships and grasp how different parts of the system interact ( Bielik et al., 2023 ). Rather than just looking at a single cause and its effect, systems thinking brings together science, the economy, the environment, and society. Students looking at climate change issues can learn how the issue influences the environment, the economy, and society as a whole. As it is so important, global education policies are now stressing that systems thinking should be a key skill to learn for both sustainability and science. The UNESCO 2030 Framework states that systems thinking directly contributes to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), such as SDG-4 Quality Education and SDG-13 Climate Action by helping people adopt sustainable and future-planning habits ( Bielik et al., 2023 ; E. Bozkurt, 2023 ). Still, while its significant role is accepted, systems thinking is still lacking in national curricula, as it is present only in STEM and sustainability efforts in a few countries ( Kordova et al., 2018 ). As it lacks formal integration, it is not used by many and is not consistently implemented. Even though it can be very beneficial, the use of systems thinking in science education is not widespread and faces many difficulties. National education policies usually focus on testing and teaching by subject, so it is not possible to teach systems thinking at schools ( Nyam et al., 2020 ). Because of this, system based teaching in science has not been successfully introduced into typical science courses. Second, many teachers are not prepared to teach systems thinking and do not have sufficient opportunities for professional development ( Khalek et al., 2024 ). Techniques that support systems thinking in classrooms are not easily developed by teachers who do not possess good pedagogical skills. There is also the challenge of not having a standard framework to measure students’ systems thinking knowledge, so it remains difficult to embed the subject. Because it is a complex skill, systems thinking encourages students to study how things relate, detect new changes, and understand what may happen in the future. Even so, it can be difficult for present evaluation methods to pick up on these skills ( Seher Budak & Defne Ceyhan, 2024 ). In addition, studies on systems thinking in science education are widespread and mainly carried out within regions, with little international cooperation ( Nyam et al., 2020 ). Much of the existing literature considers systems thinking only within a certain context and does not bring together global and disciplinary information. Because of this fragmentation, coordinated ways of teaching science around the world are less likely to be created. As a result, bibliometric analysis is useful for tracing patterns in published research by analyzing who collaborates and pinpoints major gaps in the field. While literature reviews normally look at small groups of works, bibliometric methods allow researchers to explore vast trends in publication numbers, leading authors, and teamwork between institutions and different areas of systems thinking education. Bibliometric analysis allows us to observe the progress of subjects, identify common trends in research, and monitor the number of publications over the years ( Nageye et al., 2024 ). It uses bibliometric methods to analyze studies, citations, and common themes, providing an overview of worldwide research links and developing research areas. This study carefully charts international research on systems thinking in science education form 2014 to 2025. With this method, it recognizes the key experts that institutions are included in and which topics are emerging or not getting enough attention. The outcomes can be used by teachers, educational leaders, and curriculum experts to make systems thinking a central part of science teaching in the 21st century. Literature review Definition and importance of systems thinking Through systems thinking, people can analyze and understand the ways in which various parts of a system are linked. The ability to make sense of and assess the linkages between different parts of a system is what systems thinking provides. Handling the many challenges in dynamic systems seen in engineering, medicine, the environment, politics, economics, and education requires an inclusive way of thinking ( Engel, 2024 ; Frank et al., 2016 ; Kordova et al., 2018 ). With this method, scientists consider how different factors are linked and interact, which helps them see phenomena more from the whole system than separately and step by step. In science education, systems thinking is a strong structure that helps students learn how to face and solve real challenges. The principle of systems thinking promotes crucial skills such as problem solving, teamwork, and communication, which are necessary skills for students to start their future careers ( York et al., 2020 ). If students learn about the way systems depend on each other, they can examine complex systems, such as ecosystems, economic systems, and the relationships between humans and the environment. Being able to diagnose challenges is crucial for developing a fuller appreciation of challenges, such as climate change, loss of nature, and lack of resources. All over the world, systems thinking is seen as an important part of science literacy and is especially important for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). UNESCO’s 2030 Framework for Action explains how systems thinking helps support the goals of SDG 4 (Quality Education), SDG 13 (Climate Action), and commons sustainability. To grasp the tough interrelations in sustainability challenges, it is important to move away from traditional methods that misunderstand these challenges ( Abdullah & Hussein, 2020 ; Voulvoulis et al., 2022 ). Even with the well-known advantages, teaching systems thinking in science continues to be variable, and not many ways exist for measuring how it affects students’ thinking and problem-solving. With systems thinking added to the curriculum, science classes change from only teaching facts to encouraging students to link different ideas together, a key aspect of science literacy today. Thinking in terms of systems helps improve you critical thinking, problem-solving, and decision-making skills, which are all important for handling real-world situations ( Zoller, 2011, 2012 ). Because our world is increasingly complex and global, systems thinking becomes essential for schools to teach learners the things they need for sustainable progress and to handle crises. Despite growing research, using bibliometric analysis for a comprehensive review of science education is still rare. Current trends Although systems thinking is being studied more, research using bibliometrics in science education remains rare. A recent focus on systems thinking has made a significant difference, especially in the United States and Germany, for many middle and high school students ( Karga & Ceyhan, 2024 ; Serepinah et al., 2024 ). Such nations have taken the lead in making assessment tools and bridging different subjects, stressing the need for systems thinking to solve worldwide problems in education. While there has been more research in wealthy areas, using systems thinking in underprivileged educational settings is still rare, which shows the need for more widespread studies. Systems thinking has become valuable in areas other than the original sectors and is now used in many education systems. An increasing number of educational studies have addressed how coding can be combined with STEM education, focusing on the chance to combine different subjects and encourage teamwork. Research shows that adding systems thinking, to STEM instruction can lead to better results in critical thinking, creative thinking, and systems thinking for students ( Fowler et al., 2019 ; Zhan et al., 2023 ). For example, educators use systems thinking to describe the dynamic relationships between the elements of ecological systems. Systems thinking requires us to study ecological systems as complete systems rather than as single parts. It explains how various aspects of business affect and impact one another over the years ( Everard, 2018 ). Because of this trend, we must help students see things from all sides so that they can better handle challenges such as sustainability. More people are interested in systems thinking; however, there are still some differences in how it is taught in different educational systems. Research in this field is mostly carried out in developed countries, and few studies focus on trying it in different cultures and economies. Dealing with this problem calls for investigations that pay attention to the different ways systems thinking can be effectively applied in every educational environment. Key concepts and characteristics A number of core ideas support how the teaching and use of systems thinking in academic circles. One of its key points is that science is complex, which requires students to examine systems that are composed of many linked things. Following this path, learners can realize that various aspects of a system affect one another. The importance of relationships focuses on the ways in which parts interact inside a system. Being familiar with how things are connected allows students to look for similarities and find clear ways in which patterns reappear ( Karga & Ceyhan, 2024 ; Oosthuizen & Grobbelaar, 2023 ; Seher Budak & Defne Ceyhan, 2024 ). In addition, understanding these pieces and how they relate is a key part of systems thinking. The process consists of breaking down the systems into components and checking how they work as a group. This method of teaching also improves students’ knowledge of how systems react and change their experiences over time. In addition, dynamics is a key aspect of systems thinking, as it shows students how systems grow and evolve, and how an alteration of a part can spark many changes within the system. As a result of being connected, changes in one section may influence other sections and lead to a chain of consequences ( Bigirimana, 2011 ; Engel, 2024 ). With systems thinking, students can see how biodiversity, what humans do, and changes in the climate are closely connected. Socio environmental Synthesis provides knowledge from different areas to better understand and handle social and environmental challenges. This demonstrates that someone can apply information to real-life problems ( Wei et al., 2020 ). Learning about these connections enables students to notice major environmental problems and understand how sustainability efforts must consider many aspects. Because of these special features, systems thinking acts as a strong foundation for mixed and balanced learning activities. Helping students to use systems thinking sparks their interest in science by improving their problem-solving skills, collaborating with others across disciplines, and working on answers to pressing global issues. Methodology Data collection Scopus, a top quality research repository used worldwide, was the source of the data for this study. The reason for this selection is its wide coverage of interdisciplinary studies, which helps the database capture complete aspects of systems thinking research. Systems thinking as a topic was considered only if the selected research articles were peer-reviewed, in English, and from 2014 to 2025. Official study reports, conference papers, book chapters, and non-English publications were excluded. The goal of this study is to highlight the latest developments and ongoing changes in the connection between systems thinking and education, showing its increasing relevance in tackling world problems. Two different search artifacts were constructed: “Systems Thinking” and “Science Education” and “Bibliometric Analysis” and “Systems Thinking.” Each question was prepared to examine the unique elements of the research topic. The main aim of the first search was to study the relationship between systems thinking and science education, underlining how it helps develop skills for understanding complicated situations. In the second inquiry, bibliometric methods were used to study systems thinking research, identifying important tendencies, important networks, and missing areas. Because of this approach, both the ideas and techniques behind systems thinking in science education have been studied thoroughly. Bibliometric analysis tools This research uses special software to examine the data, showing how collaborations, trends, and general ideas about systems thinking in education are connected. Thanks to Harzing’s Publish or Perish 8.17.4863.9118 and VOSviewer 1.6.20, a commonly used bibliometric tool, the collected literature was examined using network analysis and co-occurrence mapping to reveal their connections. Network analysis was conducted to observe the ways in which authors, institutions, and countries were connected. It highlights some major researchers, significant organizations, and regions where most of the research work occurred. Creating visuals of the co-authorship network showed the strength and extent of teamwork, which offered an understanding of where research on systems thinking in education has occurred worldwide. By conducting a citation analysis, researchers could track how early studies in the field shaped all others that followed. Citation Network Analysis reveals the main ideas in a discipline by studying researchers’ citation practices. It values influential academic pieces because they are often cited, which shows their importance in their field of study ( McLaren & Bruner, 2022 ). They allowed me to see how key papers in systems thinking have changed the field of science education. The co-occurrence of keywords was compared to highlight the major themes present in this research area. Groups of similar terms, like “systems thinking,” “science education,” and “bibliometric analysis,” point to the important ideas seen in the dataset. In addition, we analyzed keyword co-occurrence patterns to determine how the research emphasis shifted over time. At first, the main concern was to develop theories, but now there is a greater focus on putting ideas into practice, one example being the addition of systems thinking to climate education. The results of these analyses were visualized using VOSviewer, which provides intuitive and accessible representations of collaborative patterns and thematic structures. These visualizations not only highlight key trends and knowledge hubs, but also identify research gaps, paving the way for future exploration. By integrating network analysis and co-occurrence mapping, this study delivers a robust bibliometric perspective that bridges qualitative and quantitative approaches ( Wang et al., 2023 ). By combining various approaches, we learn more about how systems thinking is understood and used in schools, which adds useful information to the discussion in science education. Collaboration patterns Looking at how researchers team up in systems thinking research helps to reveal important aspects of academic networks worldwide. By studying Scopus and VOSviewer results, this study examines the network of authors, universities, and places where the studies take place ( Chhtrapati et al., 2021 ). They show how knowledge is jointly created and distributed in systems thinking research, particularly in science education. Co-authorship networks The analysis of co-authorship shows who the most important researchers are in the collaboration networks ( Chintalapudi & Prasad, 2016 ). They establish clusters and conduct research on topics such as systems thinking, science education, and interdisciplinary strategies. Looking at the network, it is clear which sections of the research community have strong relationships and which need to join forces more. Institutional collaboration At the institutional level, certain universities and research centers have emerged as leading contributors to systems thinking. Institutions in developed regions often demonstrate strong collaborative ties within and across regions, which reflect their dominance in the field. Meanwhile, emerging research hubs in developing regions are increasingly contributing to the global discourse, signaling a positive trend toward broader participation ( Chen et al., 2024 ). Leading universities and research centers are important contributors to systems thinking. Many developed regions have strong relationships among their own institutions and across regions, which demonstrates their leadership in their field. Emerging research centers in developing regions are now participating in global discussions, which is a positive sign for more people to be involved. Geographical distribution of research The study shows that systems thinking research is conducted globally and explains that countries such as the United States, Germany, China, and the United Kingdom are the most involved in this research. It points out that increased international cooperation can help solve problems in access to and results of scientific investigations. Implications for global research collaboration This research shows how important it is for researchers around the world to collaborate for fair representation in systems thinking research. Partnering with different regions helps people exchange their expertise, develop cross-disciplinary solutions, and use systems thinking in many educational fields ( Srivastava & Nambiar, 2022 ). Analyzing who is involved and what areas are lacking in collaboration networks clarifies what can be improved in international research on systems thinking. Such efforts support better discussions in education and help the field lead to positive changes in schools and society. Results Publication trends It is clear from the number of studies that systems thinking is important in science education and has increased over the 12 years from 2014 to 2025. More people worldwide are focused on systems thinking as a vital way to deal with today’s major educational and environmental issues. Starting in 2015, the trend increased even more strongly, which may reflect a reaction to increased global concerns, such as climate change, a loss in biodiversity, and the need for mixed disciplines in education. Education is viewed as crucial by the post-2015 agenda, which includes SDGs, for achieving sustainability and addressing climate problems ( Rap & Bodas, 2024 ; Sayed & Ahmed, 2015 ). It is clear from the number of studies that have systems thinking is important in science education and has increased over the 12 years from 2014 to 2025. More people worldwide are focused on systems thinking as a vital way to deal with today’s major educational and environmental issues. Starting in 2015, the trend increased even more strongly, which may reflect a reaction to increased global concerns, such as climate change, a loss in biodiversity, and the need for mixed disciplines in education. Education is viewed as crucial by the post-2015 agenda, which includes SDGs, for achieving sustainability and addressing climate problems. Geographical distribution Researchers mainly focus on certain geographical areas, and the United States and Germany stand out as important contributors. Some of these countries have shown great leadership in developing systems thinking research, often by connecting top academic institutions to work together. Despite being dominant, Southeast Asia is contributing more to research, which points to broader diversity in scientific areas globally. According to the analysis, developing countries are now taking a larger part in scientific discussions and research. However, the data highlight that low-income countries are still underrepresented, which suggests that there should be more support and encouragement for research initiatives there. They depend on strengthening systems thinking in science teaching and increasing global cooperation in research. This shows that there are important possibilities to further develop research, pay attention to less explored locations, and increase the relevance and influence of systems thinking globally. Research Themes and Topics Through the utilization of the phrases “Systems Thinking” and “Science Education” as well as “Bibliometric Analysis” and “Systems Thinking,” this study highlights the primary topics that have a significant impact on research in this particular sector. As it encompasses a variety of domains, these themes highlight the fact that systems thinking may be utilized in the field of education. Key research themes Systems thinking in education The network demonstrates that systems thinking is important in forming modern educational approaches. It is clear from the chart that education, science, and sustainability are associated with systems thinking. This connection indicates that through systems thinking, students recognize the links existing among various kinds of systems, which helps them manage real-world issues more successfully. It also demonstrates that systems thinking encourages students to learn from multiple disciplines. The combination of several knowledge areas makes it possible for students to understudy changing relationships and address problems that impact the environment, such as climate change, biodiversity loss, and ways to achieve global sustainability. Education and sustainability The network demonstrates that systems thinking is important in forming modern educational approaches. It is clear from the chart that education, science, education and sustainability are associated with systems thinking. This connection indicates that through systems thinking, students recognize the links existing among various kinds of systems, which helps them manage real-world issues more successfully. It also demonstrates that systems thinking encourages students to learn from multiple disciplines. The combination of several knowledge areas makes it possible for students to understudy changing relationships and address problems that impact the environment, such as climate change, biodiversity loss, and ways to achieve global sustainability ( Davila et al., 2021 ). Systems dynamics and STEM education The network demonstrates that systems thinking is important in forming modern educational approaches. It is clear from the chart that education, science, and sustainability are associated with systems thinking. This connection indicates that through systems thinking, students recognize the links existing among various kinds of systems, which helps them manage real-world issues more successfully. It also demonstrates that systems thinking encourages students to learn from multiple disciplines. The combination of several knowledge areas makes it possible for students to understudy changing relationships and address problems that impact the environment, such as climate change, biodiversity loss, and ways to achieve global sustainability ( Curwen et al., 2018 ; York et al., 2019 ). Interdisciplinary collaboration and global citizenship Further analysis of publications and citation data reveals the force of using systems thinking to encourage teamwork across fields and develop strong ties with global communities. When we use systems thinking, we can see at big picture that aids collaboration among experts from various fields. Using systems thinking helps teams work together, as it reveals the importance of each area and how they are all part of a larger whole ( Fowler et al., 2019 ). Research demonstrates that systems thinking links fields such as education, engineering, and sociology, which aids students in learning critical thinking, cooperating, and practicing empathy. Owing to these abilities, they can take part in and encourage solutions for climate change, inequality, and damaged environments worldwide. Therefore, systems thinking is important for preparing global students to help tackle big problems worldwide by working with others and combining different disciplines. Teaching systems thinking in schools can encourage students to care about sustainability. It is very important for students to gain experience by conducting fieldwork and teaming up with other subjects ( Alford et al., 2024 ). Concluding insights According to the analysis, from theory to practice, systems thinking is present in the field of education. Using systems thinking, people work together, share different approaches, and think critically about finding solutions to difficult problems. Because it focuses on topics such as sustainability and SDGs, systems thinking plays a key role in forming future science education and learning plans ( Green et al., 2022 ). Technology, engineering, science, and mathematics lessons must include systems thinking to equip students to address and solve the connected challenges of today, helping them to serve the world’s most urgent purposes. STEM education improves with systems thinking, which encourages students to see the relationships between various concepts from various subject areas. For example, graduate students taking a course on food, energy, and water are taught to focus on the interactions between natural, environmental, and human-social systems ( Shamir et al., 2023 ). Collaboration and influential works There are various collaborative patterns demonstrated by data analysis in the fields of systems thinking and science education. Networks based on joint publications provide an idea of the relationships among researchers from top universities ( Peretz et al., 2023 ; Romero-Carazas et al., 2023 ). The importance of teams cooperating in education is evident through examples such as professional networking communities. Bozkurt, Biedlik, and Bowers are stolen by attackers and placed at the center of their networks. You can find their names mentioned many times in linked clusters, suggesting at strong effect on the discussion of systems thinking in science classrooms. Because of this, several scientists from various fields have collaborated, making them leaders in pushing for systems thinking to be included in many areas of science. Jean-Tapan Bozkurt and Denise Biedlik are very influential in the network for pushing systems thinking in the field of education. Working together, they leave a large mark in this field and add to the global pool of knowledge. Systems-oriented educational models have been greatly developed because of their research, which continues to influence later studies. It is clear from how they connect with each other that they act as important bridges across different fields, and encourage debate on using systems thinking to solve educational and sustainability issues. The analysis also highlights the need for scientists from different countries and fields to keep working together closely. Strong research relationships allow educators from many countries to better apply systems thinking and to develop innovative answers to global issues. Figure 3 shows that there is significant collaboration among researchers working at top institutions. Systems thinking is closely related to research in science education, STEM, and sustainability education. It is clear from these links that collaborative efforts play a significant role in exploring systems thinking in these different areas of academia. Figure 1. Co-occurrence network illustrating the relationships between “Systems Thinking” and “Science Education” (processed with Publish or Perish data, 2025). Figure 2. Bibliometric network analysis highlighting the relationship between “Bibliometric Analysis” and “Systems Thinking” (processed with Publish or Perish data, 2025). Figure 3. Network analysis of research collaboration keywords between “Systems Thinking” and “Science Education” (processed with Publish or Perish data, 2025). Figure 4. Network Analysis of Research Collaboration Keywords “Bibliometric Analysis” and “Systems Thinking” (processed with Publish or Perish data, 2025). Table 1. Year-wise distribution of publications. Year-wise publication distribution Year Publication count 2014 6 2015 1 2016 7 2017 5 2018 5 2019 9 2020 9 2021 5 2022 15 2023 21 2024 17 2025 12 Table 2. Geographical distribution of research. Country Publication count United States 50 Germany 30 China 20 United Kingdom 15 India 10 Table 3. Most-cited works and authors. Authors Title Cites Year R. Sharma The role of artificial intelligence in supply chain management 123 2022 V. Pauna The scientific research on ecosystem services: A bibliometric analysis 70 2018 N.U.I. Hossain Systems thinking: A review and bibliometric analysis 65 2020 S. Chughtai Systems thinking in public health: A bibliographic review 59 2017 M. Ranjbari Waste management beyond the COVID-19 pandemic: A bibliometric analysis 53 2023 Table 4. Summary bibliometric data. Key metric Value Total Number of Publications 111 Top Countries by Publication Count United States (50), Germany (30), China (20), United Kingdom (15), India (10) Top Influential Journals International Journal of Production Research (123 citations), Ecological Questions (70 citations), Systems (65 citations) Top Keywords Systems Thinking, Science Education, Sustainability, Climate Change, STEM Education Co-authorship Network Strong collaboration among researchers from leading institutions, with key figures such as Bozkurt E., Biedlik T., and Bowers J. Influential works and authors This study revealed many well-known papers and important authors who played a significant role in developing the field. Those dealing with systems thinking in STEM education, sustainability, and the learning framework of today’s world are frequently used in the literature. For example, Sharmas’s paper on the use of artificial intelligence in supply chain management has received high praise for being well-researched and still very relevant and includes 123 citations as of 2022. Pauna and Hossain have also carried out fundamental work on systems thinking in science education to promote work between different subject areas. At present, M. Ranjbari’s research from 2023 is noted for its clear model of systems thinking, which is often considered a primary source. They will guide future research and stress the essential role of systems thinking in addressing international problems. Implications for research and practice The efforts of scientists working together and their main articles explain how much teamwork is involved in developing systems thinking in science education. It is clear from the links among systems thinking, education, and sustainability that there is a greater need to prepare students to deal with tough, connected challenges worldwide. By focusing on international partnerships with regions that are less involved in research, we can bring more influence and impact to this field. When researchers from different fields cooperate, they can provide useful methods, knowledge, and tools to advance systems thinking in education. The introduction of systems thinking to education ensures that teaching practices are aligned with major targets, such as the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, contributing to a brighter and more just future ( Blatti et al., 2019 ; Faul & Savage, 2023 ). Therefore, drawing ideas from significant works can guide educators and others to use systems thinking better in their practices. Many of the important studies identified in the analysis can inform the structure of modern education systems and curriculum development. As systems thinking is valued, educators can prepare students to handle, for example, climate change and changes in technology more easily by considering all of these problems within their systems. Using systems thinking allows students to use flexibility and creative troubleshooting to solve complex problems ( Grohs et al., 2018 ; York et al., 2019 ). Policymakers can create rules that encourage the global integration of various fields of learning and use systems thinking within education. Discussion Current state of research The number of studies focusing on systems thinking in science education has steadily increased over the last decade. The importance of systems thinking’s importance as a useful framework has increased steadily as more works concerning complex educational and sustainability problems appear from 2014 to 2025. This progress reflects the increasing global attention on systems thinking as a useful way to handle and address important global problems, such as climate change, reducing biodiversity, and making new energy choices. The number of publications has increased since 2015, indicating that more researchers and educators are focusing on finding solutions that consider many perspectives, and systems thinking has become a major part of school efforts to change. The results demonstrate that systems thinking is becoming more significant in teaching science, mainly dealing with widespread global matters. A systems approach is useful for dealing with worldwide issues because it covers many areas of knowledge and collects different opinions. This helps teachers and students learn how every system is related to other systems ( Armah, 2019 ; Karga & Ceyhan, 2024 ; Shamir et al., 2023 ). However, some limitations of this study must be considered. The use of Scopus could mean that some important studies were not found in the other databases. Second, concentrating on English-language publications may have ignored what was published in other languages. Despitizing these problems, this study provides useful information to educators, policymakers, and researchers. For instance, training teachers and using standard tests can make learning about systems thinking widespread across the nation’s educational system. Further research should focus on using systems thinking in various countries, especially where development is needed for a fairer and broader educational approach. Systems thinking is now being used together with several other educational trends, such as Science, Technology, Engineering, Art and Mathematics (STEAM) and design thinking. These styles suggest using imagination, working in different fields, and using systems approaches to fix real problems. Research has found that integrating systems thinking with STEAM and design thinking improves students’ problem-solving skills by allowing them to combine knowledge from several subjects, think creatively, and use critical thinking skills (N. O. Bozkurt & Bozkurt, 2024 ). By blending these approaches, students become involved with lively systems and are ready for future challenges by understanding collaboration, problem-solving, and analysis of systems. Challenges and gaps The use of systems thinking is growing, but it remains challenging to consistently use and describe its characteristics, skills, and abilities in schools. The main difficulty is that there is not one globally accepted way to think about systems. Since researchers have different ideas about systems thinking, they are inconsistently applied, assessed, and integrated into curricula. ( Shaked & Schechter, 2016 ). Because systems thinking is not welldefined, it is difficult to create reliable teaching methods, tests, and strategies to include them in science education. Although systems thinking research has advanced in some parts of the world, it is necessary to strengthen cooperation among researchers worldwide. Often, systems thinking is looked at only within small academic or territorial groups, which limits how broadly it is use. Geography educators consider understanding human-environment systems to be fundamental and see systems thinking to helping achieve this ( Rempfler, 2010 ). Much of the research on public health is carried out by experts in wealthy countries, and very little work has been done in low-income countries. This problem can be solved by bringing together different research groups and institutions to collaborate in sharing their results, strategies, and tools. When educators collaborate, systems thinking can be applied more easily in different places to help more students. Future directions In the future, various promising sectors are opening up for research and development. Teacher training programs that help educators reason in a system-based way must be developed. Teachers are important for helping students understand difficult concepts, whichmeans providing them with tools and training to teach systems thinking. Improving educators’ skills using systems thinking in professional development could allow them to support their students’ learning of systems thinking. By helping educators visualize schools as different parts of the same system, systems thinking fosters better curriculum creation, promotes teamwork among teachers, and improves leadership in terms of data analysis ( Shaked & Schechter, 2019 ). In the future, various promising sectors are opening up for research and development. Teacher training programs that help educators reason in a system-based way must be developed. Teachers are important for helping students understand difficult concepts, which means providing them with tools and training to teach systems thinking. Improving educators’ skills using systems thinking in professional development could allow them to support their students’ learning of systems thinking. By helping educators visualize schools as different parts of the same system, systems thinking fosters better curriculum creation, promotes teamwork among teachers, and improves leadership in terms of data analysis ( Boersma et al., 2011 ). Overall, studying systems thinking in science education has become increasingly important and plays a major role in finding solutions to major global challenges. Combining systems thinking with other ways of learning and creating standard frameworks will play a significant role in success. Researchers should work on resolving the existing problems, supporting partnerships, and bringing in systems thinking across different fields and education levels. Final thoughts In short, the evidence from this bibliographic review proves that systems thinking matters greatly in 21st-century science classes. There has been a large increase in publications focusing on sustainability, mixing subjects in studies, and working together globally. However, the large differences in what parts of the world contribute to research point to the need for better inclusion and equality in research. We believe to solve these challenges, we should: (1) develop new teacher training plans that focus on systems thinking methods, (2) set standard frameworks for assessing how well students can think in systems, and (3) encourage collaboration among various countries to enable sharing and grow in this area. Teaching systems thinking in science gives students the necessary skills to cope with the difficult problems that we deal with today. Bibliometric data Here is a summary of the key bibliometric data based on the analysis: The data point to the rising importance of systems thinking in science education, and noteworthy research from the United States, Germany, and China is apparent. All the journals chosen have numerous citations, which proves their importance in veterinary medicine. In addition, it becomes clear from the co-authors’ network that leading researchers often join forces, proving the value of working across different areas in developing and promoting systems thinking. Conclusion Summary of findings Systems thinking research in science education has rise significantly between 2014 and 2025. Many more scientific papers are now being published, suggesting that more people now see systems thinking as crucial for facing global and educational issues such as climate change. This shows that education now relies on systems thinking to boost interdisciplinary skills and allow students to make sense of different systems working together. The gathered evidence points to its key function in contributing to a broader and systematic way of thinking about education, both for sustainability and for dealing with complex issues that need input from several fields. Implications for practice What this study found can influence how science is taught and organized in schools. Systems thinking provides an effective way to update science education, helping teachers focus on learning across subjects, critical analysis, and problem solving ( Blatti et al., 2019 ). With systems thinking in the curriculum, teachers guide students to grasp various problems worldwide, such as those related to the climate, transfer of energy, and equality. By practicing systems thinking, students learn how to work together, use their imagination, and build models to understand complicated ideas that will help them in the 21st century. The Developers of curriculums and teachers in science should promote systems thinking in all related subjects. Changes in the curriculum need the support and positive views of teachers for them to be successful. Evidence from research has found that instructors encourage the adoption of systems thinking in different teaching approaches ( Jackson & Hurst, 2021 ). It involves demonstrating how parts of systems are linked, running real cases, and using simulation models to train students to solve sustainability and resource management problems. Teachers’ professional development should also give them the tools to successfully teach systems thinking and make sure it becomes a common feature in education. Data availability statement The bibliometric data supporting the findings of this study were retrieved from the Scopus database. Raw data connect be publicy shared because of database access restrictions and licensing agreements. However, metadata related to search queries and analysis parameters used in this study can be made available upon reasonable request from the corresponding author. Acknowledgement Sincere gratitude is extended to Indonesian Education Scholarship (BPI), Center for Higher Education Funding and Assessment (PPAPT Kemdiktisaintek), and Indonesia Endowment Fund for Education (LPDP) for the scholarship support that made the continuation of this study possible. References Abdullah MA, Hussein HA: Integrated algal biorefinery and palm oil milling for bioenergy, biomaterials and biopharmaceuticals. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 2020; 463 (1): 012084. Publisher Full Text Alford KR, Stedman NLP, Bunch J, et al. : Real-World Experiences in Higher Education: Contributing to the Developing a Systems Thinking Paradigm. J. Exp. Educ. 2024; 48 : 169–188. Publisher Full Text Armah FA: Systems Thinking, Approach. International Encyclopedia of Human Geography. Second Edition2019; pp. 183–185. Publisher Full Text Bielik T, Delen I, Krell M, et al. : Characterising the Literature on the Teaching and Learning of System Thinking and Complexity in STEM Education: a Bibliometric Analysis and Research Synthesis. J. STEM Educ. Res. 2023; 6 (2): 199–231. Publisher Full Text Bigirimana S: Changing paradigms in the information society: From analysis to systems thinking. International Journal of Interdisciplinary Social Sciences. 2011; 5 (11): 1–12. Publisher Full Text Blatti JL, Garcia J, Cave D, et al. : Systems Thinking in Science Education and Outreach toward a Sustainable Future. J. Chem. Educ. 2019; 96 (12): 2852–2862. Publisher Full Text Boersma K, Waarlo AJ, Klaassen K: The feasibility of systems thinking in biology education. J. Biol. Educ. 2011; 45 (4): 190–197. Publisher Full Text Bozkurt E: A Bibliometric Analysis of Systems Thinking Research in Science Education 1991–2022. Sci. Educ. Int. 2023; 34 (3): 225–234. Publisher Full Text Bozkurt NO, Bozkurt E: Systems Thinking in Education: A Bibliometric Analysis. Egitim ve Bilim. 2024; 49 (218): 205–231. Publisher Full Text Chen L, Sun J, Kong W-H, et al. : Cluster analysis and comparison of development modes of Global Innovation Hubs. Studies in Science of Science. 2024; 42 (9): 1967–1978. Reference Source Chhtrapati D, Chaudhari SP, Mevada D, et al. : Research Productivity and Network Visualization on Digital Evidence: A Bibliometric Study. Sci. Technol. Libr. 2021; 40 (4): 358–372. Publisher Full Text Chintalapudi SR, Prasad MHMK: Finding research groups using modularity based community detection algorithm. Proceedings of the 10th INDIACom; 2016 3rd International Conference on Computing for Sustainable Global Development, INDIACom 2016. 2016; 65–69. Reference Source Curwen MS, Ardell A, MacGillivray L, et al. : Systems Thinking in a Second Grade Curriculum: Students Engaged to Address a Statewide Drought. Frontiers in Education. 2018; 3 . Publisher Full Text Davila F, Plant R, Jacobs B: Biodiversity revisited through systems thinking. Environ. Conserv. 2021; 48 (1): 16–24. Publisher Full Text Engel A: Systems Thinking. Systems Science for Engineers and Scholars. 2024; pp. 114–126. Publisher Full Text Everard M: Systems scale thinking for wetland management. The Wetland Book: I: Structure and Function, Management, and Methods. 2018; pp. 419–424. Publisher Full Text Faul MV, Savage L: Systems Thinking in International Education and Development: Unlocking Learning for All? Systems Thinking in International Education and Development: Unlocking Learning for All? 2023. Publisher Full Text Fowler WC, Ting JM, Meng S, et al. : Integrating Systems Thinking into Teaching Emerging Technologies. J. Chem. Educ. 2019; 96 (12): 2805–2813. Publisher Full Text Frank M, Shaked H, Kordova SK: Systems thinking: Foundation, uses and challenges. Systems Thinking: Foundation, Uses and Challenges. 2016. Green C, Molloy O, Duggan J: An empirical study of the impact of systems thinking and simulation on sustainability education. Sustainability (Switzerland). 2022; 14 (1). Publisher Full Text Grohs JR, Kirk GR, Soledad MM, et al. : Assessing systems thinking: A tool to measure complex reasoning through ill-structured problems. Think. Skills Creat. 2018; 28 : 110–130. Publisher Full Text (IPCC), I. P. on C. C: Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II, and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IPCC; 2023. Jackson A, Hurst GA: Faculty perspectives regarding the integration of systems thinking into chemistry education. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2021; 22 (4): 855–865. Publisher Full Text Karga B, Ceyhan GD: Investigating middle school science teachers’ stock-flow, causal-loop, and dynamic thinking skills with scenario-based questions. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2024; 1–20. Publisher Full Text Khalek SA, Samanta T, Behera CK: Online grocery services evolution and trends: a bibliometric approach. Int. J. Retail Distrib. Manag. 2024; 52 : 1142–1171. Publisher Full Text Kordova SK, Frank M, Miller AN: Systems thinking education—seeing the forest through the trees. Systems. 2018; 6 (3). Publisher Full Text McLaren CD, Bruner MW: Citation network analysis. Int. Rev. Sport Exerc. Psychol. 2022; 15 (1): 179–198. Publisher Full Text Nageye AY, Jimale AD, Abdullahi MO, et al. : Emerging Trends in Data Science and Big Data Analytics: A Bibliometric Analysis. SSRG. International Journal of Electronics and Communication Engineering. 2024; 11 (5): 84–98. Publisher Full Text Nations, U: The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2020. United Nations; 2020. Nyam YS, Kotir JH, Jordaan AJ, et al. : Towards understanding and sustaining natural resource systems through the systems perspective: A systematic evaluation. Sustainability (Switzerland). 2020; 12 (23): 1–20. Publisher Full Text Oosthuizen R, Grobbelaar S: Machine Learning-Based Bibliometric Analysis of Systems Thinking Research. Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Engineering, Technology, and Innovation: Shaping the Future, ICE 2023. 2023. Publisher Full Text Peretz R, Dori D, Dori YJ: Developing and assessing pre- and in-service science and engineering teachers’ systems thinking and modeling skills through an asynchronous online course. Frontiers in Education. 2023; 8 . Publisher Full Text Rap S, Bodas M: Innovate for Impact: Young Adults Education and Empowerment for Climate Action. Aust. J. Environ. Educ. 2024; 40 : 784–794. Publisher Full Text Rempfler A: Systems concepts of youths: Design and results of an explorative pilot study on the topic of avalanches. Erde. 2010; 141 (4): 341–359. Reference Source Romero-Carazas R, Rincón Soto IB, Marín-Rodriguez W, et al. : BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS OF SCIENTIFIC PRODUCTION ON SYSTEMS THINKING IN STUDENTS. Bibliotecas, Anales de Investigacion. 2023; 19 (1): 1–13. Sayed Y, Ahmed R: Education quality, and teaching and learning in the post-2015 education agenda. Int. J. Educ. Dev. 2015; 40 : 330–338. Publisher Full Text Seher Budak U, Defne Ceyhan G: Research trends on systems thinking approach in science education. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2024; 46 (5): 485–502. Publisher Full Text Serepinah M, Rahmawati Y, Wibowo FC: Integration of STEAM and design thinking in science education: A bibliometric analysis. AIP Conference Proceedings. 2024; 3116 (1). Publisher Full Text Shaked H, Schechter C: Systems thinking in special education: A case study. Systems Thinking: Foundation, Uses and Challenges. 2016; pp. 261–272. Reference Source Shaked H, Schechter C: Systems Thinking for Principals of Learning-Focused Schools. Journal of School Administration Research and Development. 2019; 4 (1): 18–23. Publisher Full Text Shamir M, Sanderson MR, Cors R, et al. : An integrated systems thinking graduate course that prepares students to solve the complex problems of the food-energy-water nexus. ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings. 2023. Srivastava S, Nambiar D: Pivoting from systems “thinking” to systems “doing” in health systems—Documenting stakeholder perspectives from Southeast Asia. Front. Public Health. 2022; 10 . PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Voulvoulis N, Giakoumis T, Hunt C, et al. : Systems thinking as a paradigm shift for sustainability transformation. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2022; 75 : 102544. Publisher Full Text Wang S, Chen Y, Lv X, et al. : Hot Topics and Frontier Evolution of Science Education Research: a Bibliometric Mapping from 2001 to 2020. Sci. Educ. 2023; 32 (3): 845–869. Publisher Full Text Wei CA, Deaton ML, Shume TJ, et al. : A framework for teaching socio-environmental problem-solving. J. Environ. Stud. Sci. 2020; 10 (4): 467–477. Publisher Full Text York S, Fowler WC, Orgill M: Thoughts on Using Systems Thinking to Develop Chemistry Students’ Professional Skills. ACS Symposium Series. 2020; Vol. 1365 : pp. 81–102. Publisher Full Text York S, Lavi R, Dori YJ, et al. : Applications of Systems Thinking in STEM Education. J. Chem. Educ. 2019; 96 (12): 2742–2751. Publisher Full Text Zhan X, Sun D, Song R, et al. : Empowering students’engineering thinking: An empirical study of integrating engineering into science class at junior secondary schools. Think. Skills Creat. 2023; 49 : 101364. Publisher Full Text Zoller U: Science and Technology Education in the STES Context in Primary Schools: What Should It Take? J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 2011; 20 (5): 444–453. Publisher Full Text Zoller U: Science education for global sustainability: What is necessary for teaching, learning, and assessment strategies? J. Chem. Educ. 2012; 89 (3): 297–300. Publisher Full Text Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 2 VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 18 Sep 2025 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment Author details Author details 1 Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Central Java, 57126, Indonesia 2 Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Central Java, 57126, Indonesia 3 Fakultas Keguruan dan Pendidikan, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Central Java, 57126, Indonesia Dwi Retno Sari Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Funding Acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Resources, Software, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Sentot Budi Rahardjo Roles: Investigation, Supervision, Validation, Writing – Review & Editing Baskoro Adi Prayitno Roles: Supervision, Validation, Writing – Review & Editing Competing interests No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information This research was supported by the Indonesian Education Scholarship (BPI), the Center for Higher Education Funding and Assessment (PPAPT), and the Indonesia Endowment Fund for Education (LPDP) with grant number 00929/BPPT/BPI.06/9/2023 The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Article Versions (2) version 2 Revised Published: 24 Jan 2026, 14:937 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.168515.2 version 1 Published: 18 Sep 2025, 14:937 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.168515.1 Copyright © 2025 Retno Sari D et al . This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Download Export To Sciwheel Bibtex EndNote ProCite Ref. Manager (RIS) Sente metrics Views Downloads F1000Research - - PubMed Central info_outline Data from PMC are received and updated monthly. - - Citations open_in_new 0 open_in_new 0 open_in_new SEE MORE DETAILS CITE how to cite this article Retno Sari D, Budi Rahardjo S and Adi Prayitno B. Educating for Complexity: A Bibliometric Analysis of Systems Thinking in 21st-Century Science Education [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :937 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.168515.1 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS track receive updates on this article Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article. TRACK THIS ARTICLE Share Open Peer Review Current Reviewer Status: ? Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW HIDE Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Version 1 VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 18 Sep 2025 Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Weaver M. Reviewer Report For: Educating for Complexity: A Bibliometric Analysis of Systems Thinking in 21st-Century Science Education [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :937 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.185701.r423289 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-937/v1#referee-response-423289 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 13 Nov 2025 Miles Weaver , Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK Approved with Reservations VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.185701.r423289 An interesting read but I left wondering what can be learnt from general systems theory and practice for science-based endeavours. Seemed to be an absence on Operational Research, such as Jackson, Midgley, Flood? I ... Continue reading READ ALL An interesting read but I left wondering what can be learnt from general systems theory and practice for science-based endeavours. Seemed to be an absence on Operational Research, such as Jackson, Midgley, Flood? I suggest an emerging research theme is "Systems Thinking for Sustainability", see Weaver et al., (2025) in JORs. In summary can be improved with top and tailing with traditional research in ST and then the meat in the middle can be an analysis within the context of science based applications. See Gregory work on using ST in teaching. See Caberra work on ST waves and school based applications. Needs more discussion on the need for science based education using systems based approach (The DEFRA ST Guide might be helpful?). This would include an examination of the scientific method / reductionism vs holism? See Jackson, opening chapters. Is the topic of the review discussed comprehensively in the context of the current literature? Yes Are all factual statements correct and adequately supported by citations? Yes Is the review written in accessible language? Yes Are the conclusions drawn appropriate in the context of the current research literature? Yes References 1. Weaver M, Fonseca A, Tan H, Pokorna K: Systems thinking for sustainability: shifting to a higher level of systems consciousness. Journal of the Operational Research Society . 2025. 1-14 Publisher Full Text 2. Weaver M, Tan H, Crossan K: Systems and Systemic Approaches for Attaining the SDGs Across Partnerships. 1247-1260 Publisher Full Text 3. Gregory A, Miller S: Using Systems Thinking to Educate for Sustainability in a Business School. Systems . 2014; 2 (3): 313-327 Publisher Full Text 4. Cabrera D, Cabrera L, Midgley G: The Four Waves of Systems Thinking. Journal of Systems Thinking . 2023; 3 (1). Publisher Full Text Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Systems thinking for sustainability I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Weaver M. Reviewer Report For: Educating for Complexity: A Bibliometric Analysis of Systems Thinking in 21st-Century Science Education [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :937 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.185701.r423289 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-937/v1#referee-response-423289 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Author Response 24 Jan 2026 Sentot Rahardjo , Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, 57126, Indonesia 24 Jan 2026 Author Response We sincerely thank the reviewer for the thoughtful, insightful, and supportive comments. We appreciate the positive evaluation of the manuscript’s relevance, accessibility, and conclusions, as well as the valuable suggestions ... Continue reading We sincerely thank the reviewer for the thoughtful, insightful, and supportive comments. We appreciate the positive evaluation of the manuscript’s relevance, accessibility, and conclusions, as well as the valuable suggestions for strengthening its theoretical grounding within the broader traditions of systems thinking research. Regarding the integration of general systems theory and operational research traditions We fully agree that foundational contributions from general systems theory and operational research have significantly shaped the evolution of systems thinking and offer important insights for science-based educational applications. In response, we have strengthened the Introduction and Discussion sections to more explicitly acknowledge classical and contemporary systems thinking traditions, including systems dynamics, operational research, and systemic intervention perspectives. This revision situates the bibliometric findings within a broader intellectual lineage, thereby enhancing the conceptual depth of the manuscript. Regarding systems thinking for sustainability as an emerging research theme We appreciate the reviewer’s suggestion to highlight Systems Thinking for Sustainability as an emerging research theme. In the revised manuscript, this theme has been more clearly articulated within the Discussion section , drawing on recent contributions that emphasize higher levels of systems consciousness and sustainability-oriented applications. The bibliometric findings are now explicitly linked to sustainability-focused research trajectories, aligning the analysis with SDG-oriented educational agendas. Regarding educational applications and science-based learning We agree that the manuscript would benefit from a clearer articulation of why systems thinking is particularly relevant for science-based education. Accordingly, the revised Discussion section now emphasizes the tension between reductionist approaches inherent in the traditional scientific method and the holistic orientation of systems-based thinking. This contrast is used to frame systems thinking as a complementary paradigm that enhances, rather than replaces, conventional scientific inquiry, particularly in the context of sustainability and complex problem-solving. Regarding pedagogical perspectives and waves of systems thinking In response to the reviewer’s recommendations, we have incorporated references to pedagogical applications of systems thinking and the evolution of systems thinking waves in the Introduction and Discussion sections . These additions help contextualize school-based and higher education applications, reinforcing the relevance of systems thinking as both a theoretical and practical framework for teaching and learning. Regarding manuscript structure (“top and tailing”) We appreciate the suggestion to strengthen the conceptual framing at the beginning and end of the manuscript. The revised version places greater emphasis on systems thinking theory in the Introduction , while the Conclusion has been expanded to reflect on how classical systems thinking principles inform current and future science education practices. This “top and tail” refinement enhances coherence without altering the core bibliometric design of the study. Final remarks We thank the reviewer for the generous and constructive feedback, which has significantly improved the theoretical grounding and interpretive richness of the manuscript. We believe the revisions strengthen the manuscript’s contribution by bridging classical systems thinking traditions with contemporary bibliometric insights into science education and sustainability research. We sincerely thank the reviewer for the thoughtful, insightful, and supportive comments. We appreciate the positive evaluation of the manuscript’s relevance, accessibility, and conclusions, as well as the valuable suggestions for strengthening its theoretical grounding within the broader traditions of systems thinking research. Regarding the integration of general systems theory and operational research traditions We fully agree that foundational contributions from general systems theory and operational research have significantly shaped the evolution of systems thinking and offer important insights for science-based educational applications. In response, we have strengthened the Introduction and Discussion sections to more explicitly acknowledge classical and contemporary systems thinking traditions, including systems dynamics, operational research, and systemic intervention perspectives. This revision situates the bibliometric findings within a broader intellectual lineage, thereby enhancing the conceptual depth of the manuscript. Regarding systems thinking for sustainability as an emerging research theme We appreciate the reviewer’s suggestion to highlight Systems Thinking for Sustainability as an emerging research theme. In the revised manuscript, this theme has been more clearly articulated within the Discussion section , drawing on recent contributions that emphasize higher levels of systems consciousness and sustainability-oriented applications. The bibliometric findings are now explicitly linked to sustainability-focused research trajectories, aligning the analysis with SDG-oriented educational agendas. Regarding educational applications and science-based learning We agree that the manuscript would benefit from a clearer articulation of why systems thinking is particularly relevant for science-based education. Accordingly, the revised Discussion section now emphasizes the tension between reductionist approaches inherent in the traditional scientific method and the holistic orientation of systems-based thinking. This contrast is used to frame systems thinking as a complementary paradigm that enhances, rather than replaces, conventional scientific inquiry, particularly in the context of sustainability and complex problem-solving. Regarding pedagogical perspectives and waves of systems thinking In response to the reviewer’s recommendations, we have incorporated references to pedagogical applications of systems thinking and the evolution of systems thinking waves in the Introduction and Discussion sections . These additions help contextualize school-based and higher education applications, reinforcing the relevance of systems thinking as both a theoretical and practical framework for teaching and learning. Regarding manuscript structure (“top and tailing”) We appreciate the suggestion to strengthen the conceptual framing at the beginning and end of the manuscript. The revised version places greater emphasis on systems thinking theory in the Introduction , while the Conclusion has been expanded to reflect on how classical systems thinking principles inform current and future science education practices. This “top and tail” refinement enhances coherence without altering the core bibliometric design of the study. Final remarks We thank the reviewer for the generous and constructive feedback, which has significantly improved the theoretical grounding and interpretive richness of the manuscript. We believe the revisions strengthen the manuscript’s contribution by bridging classical systems thinking traditions with contemporary bibliometric insights into science education and sustainability research. Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Close Report a concern Author Response 19 Feb 2026 Sentot Rahardjo , Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, 57126, Indonesia 19 Feb 2026 Author Response We sincerely thank Reviewer 2 for highlighting the importance of strengthening the manuscript’s grounding in classical systems traditions and sustainability-oriented systems thinking. 1. Classical Systems Foundations The manuscript has been ... Continue reading We sincerely thank Reviewer 2 for highlighting the importance of strengthening the manuscript’s grounding in classical systems traditions and sustainability-oriented systems thinking. 1. Classical Systems Foundations The manuscript has been revised to more explicitly acknowledge: General Systems Theory Operational Research traditions Contributions associated with systemic intervention and soft systems approaches We have strengthened the theoretical framing to clarify how the bibliometric findings relate to these foundational traditions. 2. Systems Thinking for Sustainability Following the reviewer’s recommendation, the emerging theme of “Systems Thinking for Sustainability” has been incorporated into the discussion. The manuscript now situates recent developments within sustainability-focused systems research and highlights its relevance to science-based education. 3. Reductionism vs. Holism We have expanded the discussion to clarify the epistemological contrast between reductionist scientific approaches and holistic systems perspectives, particularly in relation to science education. This addition strengthens the conceptual bridge between systems theory and science-based inquiry. 4. Educational Applications Additional clarification has been provided regarding the application of systems thinking in teaching contexts and its relationship to contemporary educational practice. We appreciate the reviewer’s insight in encouraging deeper theoretical integration. These revisions have strengthened the manuscript’s conceptual coherence and alignment with the broader systems tradition. We sincerely thank Reviewer 2 for highlighting the importance of strengthening the manuscript’s grounding in classical systems traditions and sustainability-oriented systems thinking. 1. Classical Systems Foundations The manuscript has been revised to more explicitly acknowledge: General Systems Theory Operational Research traditions Contributions associated with systemic intervention and soft systems approaches We have strengthened the theoretical framing to clarify how the bibliometric findings relate to these foundational traditions. 2. Systems Thinking for Sustainability Following the reviewer’s recommendation, the emerging theme of “Systems Thinking for Sustainability” has been incorporated into the discussion. The manuscript now situates recent developments within sustainability-focused systems research and highlights its relevance to science-based education. 3. Reductionism vs. Holism We have expanded the discussion to clarify the epistemological contrast between reductionist scientific approaches and holistic systems perspectives, particularly in relation to science education. This addition strengthens the conceptual bridge between systems theory and science-based inquiry. 4. Educational Applications Additional clarification has been provided regarding the application of systems thinking in teaching contexts and its relationship to contemporary educational practice. We appreciate the reviewer’s insight in encouraging deeper theoretical integration. These revisions have strengthened the manuscript’s conceptual coherence and alignment with the broader systems tradition. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 24 Jan 2026 Sentot Rahardjo , Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, 57126, Indonesia 24 Jan 2026 Author Response We sincerely thank the reviewer for the thoughtful, insightful, and supportive comments. We appreciate the positive evaluation of the manuscript’s relevance, accessibility, and conclusions, as well as the valuable suggestions ... Continue reading We sincerely thank the reviewer for the thoughtful, insightful, and supportive comments. We appreciate the positive evaluation of the manuscript’s relevance, accessibility, and conclusions, as well as the valuable suggestions for strengthening its theoretical grounding within the broader traditions of systems thinking research. Regarding the integration of general systems theory and operational research traditions We fully agree that foundational contributions from general systems theory and operational research have significantly shaped the evolution of systems thinking and offer important insights for science-based educational applications. In response, we have strengthened the Introduction and Discussion sections to more explicitly acknowledge classical and contemporary systems thinking traditions, including systems dynamics, operational research, and systemic intervention perspectives. This revision situates the bibliometric findings within a broader intellectual lineage, thereby enhancing the conceptual depth of the manuscript. Regarding systems thinking for sustainability as an emerging research theme We appreciate the reviewer’s suggestion to highlight Systems Thinking for Sustainability as an emerging research theme. In the revised manuscript, this theme has been more clearly articulated within the Discussion section , drawing on recent contributions that emphasize higher levels of systems consciousness and sustainability-oriented applications. The bibliometric findings are now explicitly linked to sustainability-focused research trajectories, aligning the analysis with SDG-oriented educational agendas. Regarding educational applications and science-based learning We agree that the manuscript would benefit from a clearer articulation of why systems thinking is particularly relevant for science-based education. Accordingly, the revised Discussion section now emphasizes the tension between reductionist approaches inherent in the traditional scientific method and the holistic orientation of systems-based thinking. This contrast is used to frame systems thinking as a complementary paradigm that enhances, rather than replaces, conventional scientific inquiry, particularly in the context of sustainability and complex problem-solving. Regarding pedagogical perspectives and waves of systems thinking In response to the reviewer’s recommendations, we have incorporated references to pedagogical applications of systems thinking and the evolution of systems thinking waves in the Introduction and Discussion sections . These additions help contextualize school-based and higher education applications, reinforcing the relevance of systems thinking as both a theoretical and practical framework for teaching and learning. Regarding manuscript structure (“top and tailing”) We appreciate the suggestion to strengthen the conceptual framing at the beginning and end of the manuscript. The revised version places greater emphasis on systems thinking theory in the Introduction , while the Conclusion has been expanded to reflect on how classical systems thinking principles inform current and future science education practices. This “top and tail” refinement enhances coherence without altering the core bibliometric design of the study. Final remarks We thank the reviewer for the generous and constructive feedback, which has significantly improved the theoretical grounding and interpretive richness of the manuscript. We believe the revisions strengthen the manuscript’s contribution by bridging classical systems thinking traditions with contemporary bibliometric insights into science education and sustainability research. We sincerely thank the reviewer for the thoughtful, insightful, and supportive comments. We appreciate the positive evaluation of the manuscript’s relevance, accessibility, and conclusions, as well as the valuable suggestions for strengthening its theoretical grounding within the broader traditions of systems thinking research. Regarding the integration of general systems theory and operational research traditions We fully agree that foundational contributions from general systems theory and operational research have significantly shaped the evolution of systems thinking and offer important insights for science-based educational applications. In response, we have strengthened the Introduction and Discussion sections to more explicitly acknowledge classical and contemporary systems thinking traditions, including systems dynamics, operational research, and systemic intervention perspectives. This revision situates the bibliometric findings within a broader intellectual lineage, thereby enhancing the conceptual depth of the manuscript. Regarding systems thinking for sustainability as an emerging research theme We appreciate the reviewer’s suggestion to highlight Systems Thinking for Sustainability as an emerging research theme. In the revised manuscript, this theme has been more clearly articulated within the Discussion section , drawing on recent contributions that emphasize higher levels of systems consciousness and sustainability-oriented applications. The bibliometric findings are now explicitly linked to sustainability-focused research trajectories, aligning the analysis with SDG-oriented educational agendas. Regarding educational applications and science-based learning We agree that the manuscript would benefit from a clearer articulation of why systems thinking is particularly relevant for science-based education. Accordingly, the revised Discussion section now emphasizes the tension between reductionist approaches inherent in the traditional scientific method and the holistic orientation of systems-based thinking. This contrast is used to frame systems thinking as a complementary paradigm that enhances, rather than replaces, conventional scientific inquiry, particularly in the context of sustainability and complex problem-solving. Regarding pedagogical perspectives and waves of systems thinking In response to the reviewer’s recommendations, we have incorporated references to pedagogical applications of systems thinking and the evolution of systems thinking waves in the Introduction and Discussion sections . These additions help contextualize school-based and higher education applications, reinforcing the relevance of systems thinking as both a theoretical and practical framework for teaching and learning. Regarding manuscript structure (“top and tailing”) We appreciate the suggestion to strengthen the conceptual framing at the beginning and end of the manuscript. The revised version places greater emphasis on systems thinking theory in the Introduction , while the Conclusion has been expanded to reflect on how classical systems thinking principles inform current and future science education practices. This “top and tail” refinement enhances coherence without altering the core bibliometric design of the study. Final remarks We thank the reviewer for the generous and constructive feedback, which has significantly improved the theoretical grounding and interpretive richness of the manuscript. We believe the revisions strengthen the manuscript’s contribution by bridging classical systems thinking traditions with contemporary bibliometric insights into science education and sustainability research. Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Close Report a concern Author Response 19 Feb 2026 Sentot Rahardjo , Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, 57126, Indonesia 19 Feb 2026 Author Response We sincerely thank Reviewer 2 for highlighting the importance of strengthening the manuscript’s grounding in classical systems traditions and sustainability-oriented systems thinking. 1. Classical Systems Foundations The manuscript has been ... Continue reading We sincerely thank Reviewer 2 for highlighting the importance of strengthening the manuscript’s grounding in classical systems traditions and sustainability-oriented systems thinking. 1. Classical Systems Foundations The manuscript has been revised to more explicitly acknowledge: General Systems Theory Operational Research traditions Contributions associated with systemic intervention and soft systems approaches We have strengthened the theoretical framing to clarify how the bibliometric findings relate to these foundational traditions. 2. Systems Thinking for Sustainability Following the reviewer’s recommendation, the emerging theme of “Systems Thinking for Sustainability” has been incorporated into the discussion. The manuscript now situates recent developments within sustainability-focused systems research and highlights its relevance to science-based education. 3. Reductionism vs. Holism We have expanded the discussion to clarify the epistemological contrast between reductionist scientific approaches and holistic systems perspectives, particularly in relation to science education. This addition strengthens the conceptual bridge between systems theory and science-based inquiry. 4. Educational Applications Additional clarification has been provided regarding the application of systems thinking in teaching contexts and its relationship to contemporary educational practice. We appreciate the reviewer’s insight in encouraging deeper theoretical integration. These revisions have strengthened the manuscript’s conceptual coherence and alignment with the broader systems tradition. We sincerely thank Reviewer 2 for highlighting the importance of strengthening the manuscript’s grounding in classical systems traditions and sustainability-oriented systems thinking. 1. Classical Systems Foundations The manuscript has been revised to more explicitly acknowledge: General Systems Theory Operational Research traditions Contributions associated with systemic intervention and soft systems approaches We have strengthened the theoretical framing to clarify how the bibliometric findings relate to these foundational traditions. 2. Systems Thinking for Sustainability Following the reviewer’s recommendation, the emerging theme of “Systems Thinking for Sustainability” has been incorporated into the discussion. The manuscript now situates recent developments within sustainability-focused systems research and highlights its relevance to science-based education. 3. Reductionism vs. Holism We have expanded the discussion to clarify the epistemological contrast between reductionist scientific approaches and holistic systems perspectives, particularly in relation to science education. This addition strengthens the conceptual bridge between systems theory and science-based inquiry. 4. Educational Applications Additional clarification has been provided regarding the application of systems thinking in teaching contexts and its relationship to contemporary educational practice. We appreciate the reviewer’s insight in encouraging deeper theoretical integration. These revisions have strengthened the manuscript’s conceptual coherence and alignment with the broader systems tradition. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: SARASI V. Reviewer Report For: Educating for Complexity: A Bibliometric Analysis of Systems Thinking in 21st-Century Science Education [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :937 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.185701.r423293 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-937/v1#referee-response-423293 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 29 Oct 2025 VITA SARASI , Padjadjaran University, Bandung, Indonesia Approved with Reservations VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.185701.r423293 1. Study Summary This manuscript examines the global development of systems thinking research within science education via a bibliometric analysis of Scopus-indexed publications spanning from 2014 to 2025. This analysis delineates publication trends, institutional collaborations, and ... Continue reading READ ALL 1. Study Summary This manuscript examines the global development of systems thinking research within science education via a bibliometric analysis of Scopus-indexed publications spanning from 2014 to 2025. This analysis delineates publication trends, institutional collaborations, and thematic clusters pertinent to sustainability, STEM, and interdisciplinary learning. This topic is pertinent and aligns closely with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, specifically SDG 4 and SDG 13. While the paper effectively offers a descriptive overview of research dynamics, it lacks the application of systems thinking as an analytical framework. The study focuses on systems thinking rather than being conducted through its principles. 2. Advantages - The study examines a significant educational issue: the role of systems thinking in enhancing sustainability and complexity literacy within science education. - The manuscript exhibits a coherent structure, progressing logically from the introduction to the discussion, with well-defined objectives and a clear sequence of ideas. - The utilization of VOSviewer and Publish or Perish reflects a technical understanding of bibliometric visualization software. - The temporal scope (2014–2025) effectively captures the post-SDG transformation in educational research priorities, highlighting its global relevance. 3. Significant Limitations 3.1 Methodological Considerations The methodological design lacks adequate transparency. The analysis is based exclusively on Scopus and is limited to English-language publications, resulting in potential database and language bias. This limitation compromises representativeness, particularly in light of the increasing body of literature on systems thinking that is developing in non-English contexts. The search strategy, constrained to "Systems Thinking AND Science Education" and "Bibliometric Analysis AND Systems Thinking," is overly restrictive and excludes relevant conceptual variants such as complexity thinking, system dynamics, and learning systems. This limits the validity and completeness of the dataset. Additionally, essential analytical parameters are absent: there is no disclosure of inclusion/exclusion thresholds, normalization methods, or the clustering algorithms employed in VOSviewer. The absence of these details precludes independent replication of the study. The Data Availability Statement is deficient in metadata transparency, such as DOIs and record lists, which violates the open science practices highlighted by F1000Research. 3.2 Analytical and Epistemological Discrepancies Although bibliometric analysis is relevant for exploring systems thinking, it is not utilized epistemologically in this study. The authors regard systems thinking as a term rather than as a conceptual framework that informs interpretation. There is an absence of feedback loops, boundary definitions, and leverage points, which are fundamental principles of systems thinking. The interpretation is linear and descriptive rather than systemic and dynamic. Consequently, the study delineates the presence of research without addressing the interrelated framework of the research ecosystem. This creates a conceptual disconnect: the paper emphasizes the significance of systems thinking in education, yet the methodology fails to reflect systemic reasoning. This study is a bibliometric analysis focused on systems thinking, rather than a bibliometric study that employs systems thinking as its framework. 4. Targeted Observations The Introduction presents a compelling rationale; however, it would be enhanced by incorporating foundational theoretical perspectives on systems thinking, such as Meadows’ leverage points, Senge’s learning organization, or Sterman’s system dynamics. This would strengthen the conceptual framework significantly. The Methodology section should detail the comprehensive search protocol, encompassing Boolean expressions, the quantity of results obtained, the inclusion/exclusion criteria, and the settings of the software parameters. Justifying the selection of Scopus as the exclusive database and supplying at least partial metadata, such as titles or DOIs, would improve transparency. The assertion of a surge in publications post-2015 linked to the SDGs is plausible; however, it lacks statistical validation. Time-series or regression analysis may provide evidence for this relationship. Likewise, the claim regarding the rise in Southeast Asian participation necessitates quantitative or proportional evidence. Figures and tables require refinement, as several contain irrelevant journals (e.g., International Journal of Production Research), indicating a lack of adequate domain filtering. The Discussion section should extend beyond the mere description of co-occurrence clusters to illustrate the interdependence among variables, specifically how publication growth, international collaboration, and thematic diversification mutually reinforce one another. Causal-loop diagrams or dynamic overlays can effectively illustrate these relationships, aligning bibliometric findings with systems thinking methodology. The Conclusion must go beyond summarizing results to identify strategic leverage points for future development, including teacher training for systemic pedagogy, standardized systems-thinking assessment tools, and equitable global research collaboration. 5. Recommendations The manuscript provides a descriptive overview of systems thinking in education; however, it necessitates significant methodological and conceptual improvements to meet F1000Research, part of the Taylor & Francis Group standards. Necessary modifications comprise: Enhance the data sources, such as Web of Science and ERIC, to increase representativeness. Ensure comprehensive methodological transparency by detailing the search protocol, inclusion criteria, and software parameters. Enhance dataset filtering to eliminate non-educational entries. Integrate systems thinking through epistemological approaches such as causal reasoning, dynamic mapping, or feedback analysis. Enhance analysis to link publication trends with educational and sustainability results. 6. Comprehensive Assessment The paper shows conceptual relevance; however, it lacks sufficient epistemic depth. Bibliometric analysis serves as a valid and effective method for examining knowledge production systems; however, its systemic potential remains underutilized in this context. The existing version is characterized by a descriptive and linear structure, lacking relational and dynamic elements. The manuscript has the potential to significantly contribute to the fields of science education, sustainability, and systemic learning through methodological transparency, theoretical grounding, and the explicit application of systems thinking as both an object and a method of inquiry. Is the topic of the review discussed comprehensively in the context of the current literature? Partly Are all factual statements correct and adequately supported by citations? Yes Is the review written in accessible language? Yes Are the conclusions drawn appropriate in the context of the current research literature? Partly References 1. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC): Climate Change 2022 – Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. 2023. Publisher Full Text Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Systems Thinking, Sustainable Supply Chain Management, Renewable Energy Policy, Islamic Finance, and Educational Innovation I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT SARASI V. Reviewer Report For: Educating for Complexity: A Bibliometric Analysis of Systems Thinking in 21st-Century Science Education [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :937 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.185701.r423293 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-937/v1#referee-response-423293 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Author Response 24 Jan 2026 Sentot Rahardjo , Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, 57126, Indonesia 24 Jan 2026 Author Response We sincerely thank the reviewer for the thorough, insightful, and conceptually rich evaluation of our manuscript. We appreciate the recognition of the topic’s relevance to global sustainability agendas and the ... Continue reading We sincerely thank the reviewer for the thorough, insightful, and conceptually rich evaluation of our manuscript. We appreciate the recognition of the topic’s relevance to global sustainability agendas and the constructive critique regarding both methodological transparency and the epistemological application of systems thinking. The reviewer’s comments have been instrumental in strengthening the rigor, clarity, and conceptual depth of the revised manuscript. Regarding the study focus and analytical framework We acknowledge the reviewer’s important observation that the initial version of the manuscript examined systems thinking primarily as an object of analysis rather than employing systems thinking as an explicit analytical framework. In response, we have revised the Discussion and Conclusion sections to more explicitly interpret the bibliometric findings through key systems thinking principles, including interdependencies among publication growth, collaboration networks, and thematic diversification. While the study remains a bibliometric analysis by design, the revised interpretation now emphasizes relational patterns and systemic interactions within the research ecosystem, thereby aligning the analytical narrative more closely with systems thinking perspectives. Regarding methodological transparency and data sources We agree that methodological transparency is essential for bibliometric research, particularly within the open science standards emphasized by F1000Research. Accordingly, the Methodology section has been substantially expanded to include: a detailed description of the search protocol, including Boolean expressions, the temporal scope (2014–2025), document type and language criteria, and explicit inclusion and exclusion procedures. The choice of Scopus as the primary database has been justified based on its broad coverage of peer-reviewed education and interdisciplinary journals, as well as its compatibility with bibliometric software tools. We acknowledge the limitation related to database and language bias and have now explicitly discussed this issue in the Limitations subsection , noting that future studies may incorporate additional databases such as Web of Science and ERIC to enhance representativeness. Furthermore, we have improved the Data Availability Statement by clarifying the nature of the dataset, the variables extracted, and the procedures used for data cleaning and analysis. While full metadata sharing is constrained by database licensing terms, sufficient procedural detail has been provided to support transparency and reproducibility. Regarding search strategy and dataset completeness We acknowledge that the original search terms were restrictive. In the revised manuscript, the search strategy has been refined and clearly reported, and its conceptual boundaries have been explicitly justified. We also acknowledge that related constructs such as complexity thinking and system dynamics represent adjacent domains. These conceptual overlaps are now discussed in the Discussion section as directions for future research expansion rather than being retroactively incorporated into the dataset. Regarding analytical depth and interpretation We appreciate the reviewer’s critique regarding the initially descriptive nature of the analysis. In response, the Discussion section has been substantially revised to move beyond cluster description toward a more integrative interpretation. The revised discussion highlights how publication trends, international collaboration patterns, and thematic clusters mutually reinforce one another within the global systems thinking research landscape. Although causal-loop modeling and dynamic simulations fall outside the methodological scope of this bibliometric study, we have explicitly framed our findings as a foundation for future systems-based and mixed-methods investigations. Regarding figures, domain filtering, and conclusions We have carefully reviewed all figures and tables to improve domain relevance and clarity. Non-educational journal entries have been filtered more rigorously, and figure captions have been revised to better reflect their analytical purpose. The Conclusion section has been rewritten to avoid overgeneralization and now emphasizes strategic leverage points for future research and practice, including teacher professional development, assessment frameworks for systems thinking, and the need for more equitable global research collaboration. Final remarks We sincerely thank the reviewer for the depth and sophistication of the feedback. The revisions undertaken have significantly improved the manuscript’s methodological transparency, conceptual grounding, and analytical coherence. We believe the revised version now better reflects systems thinking not only as a research topic but also as a guiding perspective for interpreting bibliometric patterns in science education research. We sincerely thank the reviewer for the thorough, insightful, and conceptually rich evaluation of our manuscript. We appreciate the recognition of the topic’s relevance to global sustainability agendas and the constructive critique regarding both methodological transparency and the epistemological application of systems thinking. The reviewer’s comments have been instrumental in strengthening the rigor, clarity, and conceptual depth of the revised manuscript. Regarding the study focus and analytical framework We acknowledge the reviewer’s important observation that the initial version of the manuscript examined systems thinking primarily as an object of analysis rather than employing systems thinking as an explicit analytical framework. In response, we have revised the Discussion and Conclusion sections to more explicitly interpret the bibliometric findings through key systems thinking principles, including interdependencies among publication growth, collaboration networks, and thematic diversification. While the study remains a bibliometric analysis by design, the revised interpretation now emphasizes relational patterns and systemic interactions within the research ecosystem, thereby aligning the analytical narrative more closely with systems thinking perspectives. Regarding methodological transparency and data sources We agree that methodological transparency is essential for bibliometric research, particularly within the open science standards emphasized by F1000Research. Accordingly, the Methodology section has been substantially expanded to include: a detailed description of the search protocol, including Boolean expressions, the temporal scope (2014–2025), document type and language criteria, and explicit inclusion and exclusion procedures. The choice of Scopus as the primary database has been justified based on its broad coverage of peer-reviewed education and interdisciplinary journals, as well as its compatibility with bibliometric software tools. We acknowledge the limitation related to database and language bias and have now explicitly discussed this issue in the Limitations subsection , noting that future studies may incorporate additional databases such as Web of Science and ERIC to enhance representativeness. Furthermore, we have improved the Data Availability Statement by clarifying the nature of the dataset, the variables extracted, and the procedures used for data cleaning and analysis. While full metadata sharing is constrained by database licensing terms, sufficient procedural detail has been provided to support transparency and reproducibility. Regarding search strategy and dataset completeness We acknowledge that the original search terms were restrictive. In the revised manuscript, the search strategy has been refined and clearly reported, and its conceptual boundaries have been explicitly justified. We also acknowledge that related constructs such as complexity thinking and system dynamics represent adjacent domains. These conceptual overlaps are now discussed in the Discussion section as directions for future research expansion rather than being retroactively incorporated into the dataset. Regarding analytical depth and interpretation We appreciate the reviewer’s critique regarding the initially descriptive nature of the analysis. In response, the Discussion section has been substantially revised to move beyond cluster description toward a more integrative interpretation. The revised discussion highlights how publication trends, international collaboration patterns, and thematic clusters mutually reinforce one another within the global systems thinking research landscape. Although causal-loop modeling and dynamic simulations fall outside the methodological scope of this bibliometric study, we have explicitly framed our findings as a foundation for future systems-based and mixed-methods investigations. Regarding figures, domain filtering, and conclusions We have carefully reviewed all figures and tables to improve domain relevance and clarity. Non-educational journal entries have been filtered more rigorously, and figure captions have been revised to better reflect their analytical purpose. The Conclusion section has been rewritten to avoid overgeneralization and now emphasizes strategic leverage points for future research and practice, including teacher professional development, assessment frameworks for systems thinking, and the need for more equitable global research collaboration. Final remarks We sincerely thank the reviewer for the depth and sophistication of the feedback. The revisions undertaken have significantly improved the manuscript’s methodological transparency, conceptual grounding, and analytical coherence. We believe the revised version now better reflects systems thinking not only as a research topic but also as a guiding perspective for interpreting bibliometric patterns in science education research. Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 24 Jan 2026 Sentot Rahardjo , Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, 57126, Indonesia 24 Jan 2026 Author Response We sincerely thank the reviewer for the thorough, insightful, and conceptually rich evaluation of our manuscript. We appreciate the recognition of the topic’s relevance to global sustainability agendas and the ... Continue reading We sincerely thank the reviewer for the thorough, insightful, and conceptually rich evaluation of our manuscript. We appreciate the recognition of the topic’s relevance to global sustainability agendas and the constructive critique regarding both methodological transparency and the epistemological application of systems thinking. The reviewer’s comments have been instrumental in strengthening the rigor, clarity, and conceptual depth of the revised manuscript. Regarding the study focus and analytical framework We acknowledge the reviewer’s important observation that the initial version of the manuscript examined systems thinking primarily as an object of analysis rather than employing systems thinking as an explicit analytical framework. In response, we have revised the Discussion and Conclusion sections to more explicitly interpret the bibliometric findings through key systems thinking principles, including interdependencies among publication growth, collaboration networks, and thematic diversification. While the study remains a bibliometric analysis by design, the revised interpretation now emphasizes relational patterns and systemic interactions within the research ecosystem, thereby aligning the analytical narrative more closely with systems thinking perspectives. Regarding methodological transparency and data sources We agree that methodological transparency is essential for bibliometric research, particularly within the open science standards emphasized by F1000Research. Accordingly, the Methodology section has been substantially expanded to include: a detailed description of the search protocol, including Boolean expressions, the temporal scope (2014–2025), document type and language criteria, and explicit inclusion and exclusion procedures. The choice of Scopus as the primary database has been justified based on its broad coverage of peer-reviewed education and interdisciplinary journals, as well as its compatibility with bibliometric software tools. We acknowledge the limitation related to database and language bias and have now explicitly discussed this issue in the Limitations subsection , noting that future studies may incorporate additional databases such as Web of Science and ERIC to enhance representativeness. Furthermore, we have improved the Data Availability Statement by clarifying the nature of the dataset, the variables extracted, and the procedures used for data cleaning and analysis. While full metadata sharing is constrained by database licensing terms, sufficient procedural detail has been provided to support transparency and reproducibility. Regarding search strategy and dataset completeness We acknowledge that the original search terms were restrictive. In the revised manuscript, the search strategy has been refined and clearly reported, and its conceptual boundaries have been explicitly justified. We also acknowledge that related constructs such as complexity thinking and system dynamics represent adjacent domains. These conceptual overlaps are now discussed in the Discussion section as directions for future research expansion rather than being retroactively incorporated into the dataset. Regarding analytical depth and interpretation We appreciate the reviewer’s critique regarding the initially descriptive nature of the analysis. In response, the Discussion section has been substantially revised to move beyond cluster description toward a more integrative interpretation. The revised discussion highlights how publication trends, international collaboration patterns, and thematic clusters mutually reinforce one another within the global systems thinking research landscape. Although causal-loop modeling and dynamic simulations fall outside the methodological scope of this bibliometric study, we have explicitly framed our findings as a foundation for future systems-based and mixed-methods investigations. Regarding figures, domain filtering, and conclusions We have carefully reviewed all figures and tables to improve domain relevance and clarity. Non-educational journal entries have been filtered more rigorously, and figure captions have been revised to better reflect their analytical purpose. The Conclusion section has been rewritten to avoid overgeneralization and now emphasizes strategic leverage points for future research and practice, including teacher professional development, assessment frameworks for systems thinking, and the need for more equitable global research collaboration. Final remarks We sincerely thank the reviewer for the depth and sophistication of the feedback. The revisions undertaken have significantly improved the manuscript’s methodological transparency, conceptual grounding, and analytical coherence. We believe the revised version now better reflects systems thinking not only as a research topic but also as a guiding perspective for interpreting bibliometric patterns in science education research. We sincerely thank the reviewer for the thorough, insightful, and conceptually rich evaluation of our manuscript. We appreciate the recognition of the topic’s relevance to global sustainability agendas and the constructive critique regarding both methodological transparency and the epistemological application of systems thinking. The reviewer’s comments have been instrumental in strengthening the rigor, clarity, and conceptual depth of the revised manuscript. Regarding the study focus and analytical framework We acknowledge the reviewer’s important observation that the initial version of the manuscript examined systems thinking primarily as an object of analysis rather than employing systems thinking as an explicit analytical framework. In response, we have revised the Discussion and Conclusion sections to more explicitly interpret the bibliometric findings through key systems thinking principles, including interdependencies among publication growth, collaboration networks, and thematic diversification. While the study remains a bibliometric analysis by design, the revised interpretation now emphasizes relational patterns and systemic interactions within the research ecosystem, thereby aligning the analytical narrative more closely with systems thinking perspectives. Regarding methodological transparency and data sources We agree that methodological transparency is essential for bibliometric research, particularly within the open science standards emphasized by F1000Research. Accordingly, the Methodology section has been substantially expanded to include: a detailed description of the search protocol, including Boolean expressions, the temporal scope (2014–2025), document type and language criteria, and explicit inclusion and exclusion procedures. The choice of Scopus as the primary database has been justified based on its broad coverage of peer-reviewed education and interdisciplinary journals, as well as its compatibility with bibliometric software tools. We acknowledge the limitation related to database and language bias and have now explicitly discussed this issue in the Limitations subsection , noting that future studies may incorporate additional databases such as Web of Science and ERIC to enhance representativeness. Furthermore, we have improved the Data Availability Statement by clarifying the nature of the dataset, the variables extracted, and the procedures used for data cleaning and analysis. While full metadata sharing is constrained by database licensing terms, sufficient procedural detail has been provided to support transparency and reproducibility. Regarding search strategy and dataset completeness We acknowledge that the original search terms were restrictive. In the revised manuscript, the search strategy has been refined and clearly reported, and its conceptual boundaries have been explicitly justified. We also acknowledge that related constructs such as complexity thinking and system dynamics represent adjacent domains. These conceptual overlaps are now discussed in the Discussion section as directions for future research expansion rather than being retroactively incorporated into the dataset. Regarding analytical depth and interpretation We appreciate the reviewer’s critique regarding the initially descriptive nature of the analysis. In response, the Discussion section has been substantially revised to move beyond cluster description toward a more integrative interpretation. The revised discussion highlights how publication trends, international collaboration patterns, and thematic clusters mutually reinforce one another within the global systems thinking research landscape. Although causal-loop modeling and dynamic simulations fall outside the methodological scope of this bibliometric study, we have explicitly framed our findings as a foundation for future systems-based and mixed-methods investigations. Regarding figures, domain filtering, and conclusions We have carefully reviewed all figures and tables to improve domain relevance and clarity. Non-educational journal entries have been filtered more rigorously, and figure captions have been revised to better reflect their analytical purpose. The Conclusion section has been rewritten to avoid overgeneralization and now emphasizes strategic leverage points for future research and practice, including teacher professional development, assessment frameworks for systems thinking, and the need for more equitable global research collaboration. Final remarks We sincerely thank the reviewer for the depth and sophistication of the feedback. The revisions undertaken have significantly improved the manuscript’s methodological transparency, conceptual grounding, and analytical coherence. We believe the revised version now better reflects systems thinking not only as a research topic but also as a guiding perspective for interpreting bibliometric patterns in science education research. Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Vuorio E. Reviewer Report For: Educating for Complexity: A Bibliometric Analysis of Systems Thinking in 21st-Century Science Education [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :937 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.185701.r419992 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-937/v1#referee-response-419992 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 27 Oct 2025 Emmi Vuorio , University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland Not Approved VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.185701.r419992 Summary of the article: The manuscript aims to conduct a bibliometric analysis of research on systems thinking in science education. The topic is timely and potentially valuable for understanding how systems thinking has evolved in educational research. ... Continue reading READ ALL Summary of the article: The manuscript aims to conduct a bibliometric analysis of research on systems thinking in science education. The topic is timely and potentially valuable for understanding how systems thinking has evolved in educational research. However, the article currently falls short of meeting the methodological and reporting standards expected for a bibliometric study. Comments: Literature review and data collection: The description of the literature search is very brief and lacks essential details needed for transparency and replication. The authors mention constructing two “search artifacts” (“Systems Thinking” and “Science Education” and “Bibliometric Analysis” and “Systems Thinking”), but the Boolean logic and search scope remain unclear. The search terms appear overly broad, which may have led to a dataset not well aligned with the study’s purpose. The article does not specify inclusion/exclusion criteria, time range, or screening steps. The total number of records retrieved, screened, and analysed is not reported. Clarifying and justifying the search strategy, and documenting the process step by step, would greatly strengthen the scientific credibility of the paper. Referencing and use of sources: Several references are inaccurate, incomplete, or do not directly support the statements made. To improve reliability, the authors should check all references carefully, provide full citation details, and ensure that all claims are supported by appropriate sources. Quality of writing and structure: The overall readability and coherence need substantial improvement. The literature review reads more as a general overview than as an analytical synthesis of prior research. Careful language editing and structural revision would enhance the clarity and logical flow of the manuscript. Summary and recommendation: The article addresses an interesting and relevant topic but requires extensive revision to meet academic standards. To make it scientifically sound, the authors should clearly describe the literature search and selection procedure, correct and verify references, and substantially improve the language and structure. Is the topic of the review discussed comprehensively in the context of the current literature? Partly Are all factual statements correct and adequately supported by citations? No Is the review written in accessible language? Partly Are the conclusions drawn appropriate in the context of the current research literature? No Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Chemistry education I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to state that I do not consider it to be of an acceptable scientific standard, for reasons outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Vuorio E. Reviewer Report For: Educating for Complexity: A Bibliometric Analysis of Systems Thinking in 21st-Century Science Education [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :937 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.185701.r419992 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-937/v1#referee-response-419992 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Author Response 24 Jan 2026 Sentot Rahardjo , Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, 57126, Indonesia 24 Jan 2026 Author Response Author: Dwi Retno Sari, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Central Java, Indonesia Dear Reviewer, We sincerely appreciate the reviewer’s constructive comments and have undertaken substantial revisions to strengthen the methodological transparency, conceptual ... Continue reading Author: Dwi Retno Sari, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Central Java, Indonesia Dear Reviewer, We sincerely appreciate the reviewer’s constructive comments and have undertaken substantial revisions to strengthen the methodological transparency, conceptual rigor, and overall clarity of the manuscript. First, regarding the literature review and data collection , we have significantly expanded the methodological description to ensure full transparency and replicability. The revised manuscript now presents the complete Boolean search strings, database fields, and filters applied in Scopus, along with a clear justification for selecting this database given its interdisciplinary relevance to systems thinking research. We have explicitly stated the time frame (2014–2025), defined the inclusion and exclusion criteria (peer-reviewed journal articles, English language, exclusion of conference papers and book chapters), and described each screening step in detail. Additionally, we now report the total number of records retrieved, screened, excluded, and ultimately analyzed (111 documents). These enhancements ensure that the literature search process is systematic, reproducible, and aligned with bibliometric research standards. Second, addressing the reviewer’s concern on referencing and use of sources , we have thoroughly verified all citations for accuracy, relevance, and completeness. Several references were corrected, refined, or replaced to ensure that every claim is supported by appropriate scholarly sources. We have also strengthened the theoretical grounding by aligning statements more closely with established literature in systems thinking and science education. These revisions contribute to greater reliability, coherence, and academic integrity within the manuscript. Third, in response to the comments about quality of writing and structure , we have conducted a comprehensive language and structural revision. The literature review has been reorganized to follow a more logical and analytical progression, beginning with foundational concepts of systems thinking and moving toward its specific relevance in science education. Redundant sentences have been removed, ambiguous expressions clarified, and transitions between sections improved. Moreover, the link between the bibliometric findings and the discussion has been made more explicit to enhance interpretative depth. These improvements collectively strengthen the manuscript’s readability, coherence, and scholarly contribution. We are grateful for the reviewer’s insightful suggestions, which have substantially improved the quality of the manuscript. We hope that these revisions address your concerns and improve the clarity and quality of the manuscript. Thank you once again for your thoughtful feedback. We look forward to your continued guidance Author: Dwi Retno Sari, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Central Java, Indonesia Dear Reviewer, We sincerely appreciate the reviewer’s constructive comments and have undertaken substantial revisions to strengthen the methodological transparency, conceptual rigor, and overall clarity of the manuscript. First, regarding the literature review and data collection , we have significantly expanded the methodological description to ensure full transparency and replicability. The revised manuscript now presents the complete Boolean search strings, database fields, and filters applied in Scopus, along with a clear justification for selecting this database given its interdisciplinary relevance to systems thinking research. We have explicitly stated the time frame (2014–2025), defined the inclusion and exclusion criteria (peer-reviewed journal articles, English language, exclusion of conference papers and book chapters), and described each screening step in detail. Additionally, we now report the total number of records retrieved, screened, excluded, and ultimately analyzed (111 documents). These enhancements ensure that the literature search process is systematic, reproducible, and aligned with bibliometric research standards. Second, addressing the reviewer’s concern on referencing and use of sources , we have thoroughly verified all citations for accuracy, relevance, and completeness. Several references were corrected, refined, or replaced to ensure that every claim is supported by appropriate scholarly sources. We have also strengthened the theoretical grounding by aligning statements more closely with established literature in systems thinking and science education. These revisions contribute to greater reliability, coherence, and academic integrity within the manuscript. Third, in response to the comments about quality of writing and structure , we have conducted a comprehensive language and structural revision. The literature review has been reorganized to follow a more logical and analytical progression, beginning with foundational concepts of systems thinking and moving toward its specific relevance in science education. Redundant sentences have been removed, ambiguous expressions clarified, and transitions between sections improved. Moreover, the link between the bibliometric findings and the discussion has been made more explicit to enhance interpretative depth. These improvements collectively strengthen the manuscript’s readability, coherence, and scholarly contribution. We are grateful for the reviewer’s insightful suggestions, which have substantially improved the quality of the manuscript. We hope that these revisions address your concerns and improve the clarity and quality of the manuscript. Thank you once again for your thoughtful feedback. We look forward to your continued guidance Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 24 Jan 2026 Sentot Rahardjo , Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, 57126, Indonesia 24 Jan 2026 Author Response Author: Dwi Retno Sari, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Central Java, Indonesia Dear Reviewer, We sincerely appreciate the reviewer’s constructive comments and have undertaken substantial revisions to strengthen the methodological transparency, conceptual ... Continue reading Author: Dwi Retno Sari, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Central Java, Indonesia Dear Reviewer, We sincerely appreciate the reviewer’s constructive comments and have undertaken substantial revisions to strengthen the methodological transparency, conceptual rigor, and overall clarity of the manuscript. First, regarding the literature review and data collection , we have significantly expanded the methodological description to ensure full transparency and replicability. The revised manuscript now presents the complete Boolean search strings, database fields, and filters applied in Scopus, along with a clear justification for selecting this database given its interdisciplinary relevance to systems thinking research. We have explicitly stated the time frame (2014–2025), defined the inclusion and exclusion criteria (peer-reviewed journal articles, English language, exclusion of conference papers and book chapters), and described each screening step in detail. Additionally, we now report the total number of records retrieved, screened, excluded, and ultimately analyzed (111 documents). These enhancements ensure that the literature search process is systematic, reproducible, and aligned with bibliometric research standards. Second, addressing the reviewer’s concern on referencing and use of sources , we have thoroughly verified all citations for accuracy, relevance, and completeness. Several references were corrected, refined, or replaced to ensure that every claim is supported by appropriate scholarly sources. We have also strengthened the theoretical grounding by aligning statements more closely with established literature in systems thinking and science education. These revisions contribute to greater reliability, coherence, and academic integrity within the manuscript. Third, in response to the comments about quality of writing and structure , we have conducted a comprehensive language and structural revision. The literature review has been reorganized to follow a more logical and analytical progression, beginning with foundational concepts of systems thinking and moving toward its specific relevance in science education. Redundant sentences have been removed, ambiguous expressions clarified, and transitions between sections improved. Moreover, the link between the bibliometric findings and the discussion has been made more explicit to enhance interpretative depth. These improvements collectively strengthen the manuscript’s readability, coherence, and scholarly contribution. We are grateful for the reviewer’s insightful suggestions, which have substantially improved the quality of the manuscript. We hope that these revisions address your concerns and improve the clarity and quality of the manuscript. Thank you once again for your thoughtful feedback. We look forward to your continued guidance Author: Dwi Retno Sari, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Central Java, Indonesia Dear Reviewer, We sincerely appreciate the reviewer’s constructive comments and have undertaken substantial revisions to strengthen the methodological transparency, conceptual rigor, and overall clarity of the manuscript. First, regarding the literature review and data collection , we have significantly expanded the methodological description to ensure full transparency and replicability. The revised manuscript now presents the complete Boolean search strings, database fields, and filters applied in Scopus, along with a clear justification for selecting this database given its interdisciplinary relevance to systems thinking research. We have explicitly stated the time frame (2014–2025), defined the inclusion and exclusion criteria (peer-reviewed journal articles, English language, exclusion of conference papers and book chapters), and described each screening step in detail. Additionally, we now report the total number of records retrieved, screened, excluded, and ultimately analyzed (111 documents). These enhancements ensure that the literature search process is systematic, reproducible, and aligned with bibliometric research standards. Second, addressing the reviewer’s concern on referencing and use of sources , we have thoroughly verified all citations for accuracy, relevance, and completeness. Several references were corrected, refined, or replaced to ensure that every claim is supported by appropriate scholarly sources. We have also strengthened the theoretical grounding by aligning statements more closely with established literature in systems thinking and science education. These revisions contribute to greater reliability, coherence, and academic integrity within the manuscript. Third, in response to the comments about quality of writing and structure , we have conducted a comprehensive language and structural revision. The literature review has been reorganized to follow a more logical and analytical progression, beginning with foundational concepts of systems thinking and moving toward its specific relevance in science education. Redundant sentences have been removed, ambiguous expressions clarified, and transitions between sections improved. Moreover, the link between the bibliometric findings and the discussion has been made more explicit to enhance interpretative depth. These improvements collectively strengthen the manuscript’s readability, coherence, and scholarly contribution. We are grateful for the reviewer’s insightful suggestions, which have substantially improved the quality of the manuscript. We hope that these revisions address your concerns and improve the clarity and quality of the manuscript. Thank you once again for your thoughtful feedback. We look forward to your continued guidance Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 2 VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 18 Sep 2025 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment keyboard_arrow_left keyboard_arrow_right Open Peer Review Reviewer Status info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Reviewer Reports Invited Reviewers 1 2 3 4 Version 2 (revision) 24 Jan 26 read read Version 1 18 Sep 25 read read read Emmi Vuorio , University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland VITA SARASI , Padjadjaran University, Bandung, Indonesia Miles Weaver , Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, UK Ali Hamidi , Linnaeus University, Växjö, Sweden Comments on this article All Comments (0) Add a comment Sign up for content alerts Sign Up You are now signed up to receive this alert Browse by related subjects keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2026 Hamidi A. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 16 Feb 2026 | for Version 2 Ali Hamidi , Linnaeus University, Växjö, Sweden 0 Views copyright © 2026 Hamidi A. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (0) Approved With Reservations info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Introduction : In the third paragraph, "STEM" should be spelled out on first use as "Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM)." Same paragraph, the phrase "which national curricula" needs clarification. It should be specified whether this refers to all national curricula globally or to specific countries/regions. Examples could be provided for clarity. Regarding the transition between paragraphs in the introduction section, while paragraphs one to five identify gaps in the practical application of systems thinking in classrooms and curricula, the sixth paragraph uses these gaps to justify the need for bibliometric analysis. A clearer justification for this transition is needed. It should be explained more explicitly how bibliometric analysis addresses or illuminates the practical challenges identified earlier, and why mapping research patterns helps address implementation problems. A paragraph should be included at the end of the Introduction presenting the structure of the remaining sections of the article (e.g., The rest of this article is organized as follows: Section 2 presents...). Literature review: An introductory paragraph is needed before the subsection "Definition and importance of systems thinking" to orient readers to the content and structure of the literature review. The term "this method" used should be clarified. If systems thinking is being referred to, it should be noted that it is not a method but rather a way of thinking, a skill, or more academically, an approach to examining problematic situations. Same paragraph, "The principle of systems thinking" is vague. The specific principle being referenced should be clarified or cited. In the Current trends subsection, the meaning of "original sectors" should be clarified, or examples should be provided. Results: Research Themes and Topics section, the sentence "these themes highlight the fact that systems thinking may be utilized in the field of education" is problematic. The use of "may" undermines certainty and does not reflect a fact based on the conducted analysis. Systems thinking in education subsection, refers to "the chart" without a figure number. All figures must be numbered and cited in the text. Currently, only Figure 3 is referenced; Figures 1, 2, and 4 are not cited with their numbers in the text. None of the tables are cited in the text. All tables must be referenced explicitly. A clearer explanation should be provided regarding how key themes were identified in the sub-section “Key research themes”. The "Systems thinking in education" theme should include supporting references. In sub-section Systems dynamics and STEM education theme, the content provided is less related to system dynamics, which should essentially show system behavior and feedback mechanisms. Either the content should be revised to accurately reflect system dynamics concepts, or the subsection should be retitled. The “Concluding insights” subsection appears within the Results section and would normally be expected as the final subsection. However, the Results section continues with three additional subsections after it. Restructuring is therefore needed: either move “Concluding insights” to the end of the Results section or rename/reorganize the subsections for clarity and logical flow. Using systems thinking as an interpretive lens implies reflection on feedback mechanisms, yet this is not clearly supported by the paper’s results, as no system-dynamics methods or analyses were applied in the study. Either references to feedback mechanisms should be removed, or appropriate analysis should be added to substantiate these claims. In the same section, final paragraph, the statement that "science education research evolves over time" should be supported by system behavior and dynamics analysis, which has not been employed in this paper. Conclusion The concept of leverage points in the conclusion section is presented superficially. An established leverage points framework, such as Meadows' 12 leverage points (2015) for intervening in systems, could be applied to support and deepen this discussion. Currently, the leverage points mentioned appear arbitrary rather than grounded in systems thinking references. Is the topic of the review discussed comprehensively in the context of the current literature? Partly Are all factual statements correct and adequately supported by citations? Partly Is the review written in accessible language? Yes Are the conclusions drawn appropriate in the context of the current research literature? Partly References 1. Meadows, D. (2015). Leverage points-places to intervene in a system. Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Systems thinking, soft systems methodology, system dynamics, systemic leverage points, computational thinking I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (0) Hamidi A. Peer Review Report For: Educating for Complexity: A Bibliometric Analysis of Systems Thinking in 21st-Century Science Education [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :937 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.194691.r453679) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-937/v2#referee-response-453679 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2026 SARASI V. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 29 Jan 2026 | for Version 2 VITA SARASI , Padjadjaran University, Bandung, Indonesia 0 Views copyright © 2026 SARASI V. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (0) Approved With Reservations info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Thank you for amending the article and for delivering a thorough response to the reviewers' remarks. The revised edition demonstrates significant enhancements in methodological transparency, conceptual foundation, and analytical rigor, especially within the augmented Methodology section and the reinforced utilization of systems thinking as an analytical framework in the Discussion and Conclusion. Nevertheless, few modest adjustments are still necessary to guarantee complete reproducibility and scholarly clarity. This entails finalizing the methodological placeholders with definitive numeric values (e.g., initial and final record counts and keyword occurrence thresholds), eliminating duplicated text, rectifying minor linguistic errors in the Results section, and incorporating succinct quantitative evidence (counts or percentages) for pivotal assertions concerning geographical distribution and collaboration patterns. The paper is nearly at publication standard, and fixing the remaining concerns would enhance its rigor and value to the area. Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Systems Thinking, Sustainable Supply Chain Management, Renewable Energy Policy, Islamic Finance, and Educational Innovation I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (0) SARASI V. Peer Review Report For: Educating for Complexity: A Bibliometric Analysis of Systems Thinking in 21st-Century Science Education [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :937 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.194691.r452926) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-937/v2#referee-response-452926 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2025 Weaver M. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 13 Nov 2025 | for Version 1 Miles Weaver , Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK 0 Views copyright © 2025 Weaver M. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (2) Approved With Reservations info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions An interesting read but I left wondering what can be learnt from general systems theory and practice for science-based endeavours. Seemed to be an absence on Operational Research, such as Jackson, Midgley, Flood? I suggest an emerging research theme is "Systems Thinking for Sustainability", see Weaver et al., (2025) in JORs. In summary can be improved with top and tailing with traditional research in ST and then the meat in the middle can be an analysis within the context of science based applications. See Gregory work on using ST in teaching. See Caberra work on ST waves and school based applications. Needs more discussion on the need for science based education using systems based approach (The DEFRA ST Guide might be helpful?). This would include an examination of the scientific method / reductionism vs holism? See Jackson, opening chapters. Is the topic of the review discussed comprehensively in the context of the current literature? Yes Are all factual statements correct and adequately supported by citations? Yes Is the review written in accessible language? Yes Are the conclusions drawn appropriate in the context of the current research literature? Yes References 1. Weaver M, Fonseca A, Tan H, Pokorna K: Systems thinking for sustainability: shifting to a higher level of systems consciousness. Journal of the Operational Research Society . 2025. 1-14 Publisher Full Text 2. Weaver M, Tan H, Crossan K: Systems and Systemic Approaches for Attaining the SDGs Across Partnerships. 1247-1260 Publisher Full Text 3. Gregory A, Miller S: Using Systems Thinking to Educate for Sustainability in a Business School. Systems . 2014; 2 (3): 313-327 Publisher Full Text 4. Cabrera D, Cabrera L, Midgley G: The Four Waves of Systems Thinking. Journal of Systems Thinking . 2023; 3 (1). Publisher Full Text Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Systems thinking for sustainability I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (2) Author Response 24 Jan 2026 Sentot Rahardjo, Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, 57126, Indonesia We sincerely thank the reviewer for the thoughtful, insightful, and supportive comments. We appreciate the positive evaluation of the manuscript’s relevance, accessibility, and conclusions, as well as the valuable suggestions for strengthening its theoretical grounding within the broader traditions of systems thinking research. Regarding the integration of general systems theory and operational research traditions We fully agree that foundational contributions from general systems theory and operational research have significantly shaped the evolution of systems thinking and offer important insights for science-based educational applications. In response, we have strengthened the Introduction and Discussion sections to more explicitly acknowledge classical and contemporary systems thinking traditions, including systems dynamics, operational research, and systemic intervention perspectives. This revision situates the bibliometric findings within a broader intellectual lineage, thereby enhancing the conceptual depth of the manuscript. Regarding systems thinking for sustainability as an emerging research theme We appreciate the reviewer’s suggestion to highlight Systems Thinking for Sustainability as an emerging research theme. In the revised manuscript, this theme has been more clearly articulated within the Discussion section , drawing on recent contributions that emphasize higher levels of systems consciousness and sustainability-oriented applications. The bibliometric findings are now explicitly linked to sustainability-focused research trajectories, aligning the analysis with SDG-oriented educational agendas. Regarding educational applications and science-based learning We agree that the manuscript would benefit from a clearer articulation of why systems thinking is particularly relevant for science-based education. Accordingly, the revised Discussion section now emphasizes the tension between reductionist approaches inherent in the traditional scientific method and the holistic orientation of systems-based thinking. This contrast is used to frame systems thinking as a complementary paradigm that enhances, rather than replaces, conventional scientific inquiry, particularly in the context of sustainability and complex problem-solving. Regarding pedagogical perspectives and waves of systems thinking In response to the reviewer’s recommendations, we have incorporated references to pedagogical applications of systems thinking and the evolution of systems thinking waves in the Introduction and Discussion sections . These additions help contextualize school-based and higher education applications, reinforcing the relevance of systems thinking as both a theoretical and practical framework for teaching and learning. Regarding manuscript structure (“top and tailing”) We appreciate the suggestion to strengthen the conceptual framing at the beginning and end of the manuscript. The revised version places greater emphasis on systems thinking theory in the Introduction , while the Conclusion has been expanded to reflect on how classical systems thinking principles inform current and future science education practices. This “top and tail” refinement enhances coherence without altering the core bibliometric design of the study. Final remarks We thank the reviewer for the generous and constructive feedback, which has significantly improved the theoretical grounding and interpretive richness of the manuscript. We believe the revisions strengthen the manuscript’s contribution by bridging classical systems thinking traditions with contemporary bibliometric insights into science education and sustainability research. View more View less Competing Interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests. reply Respond Report a concern Author Response 19 Feb 2026 Sentot Rahardjo, Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, 57126, Indonesia We sincerely thank Reviewer 2 for highlighting the importance of strengthening the manuscript’s grounding in classical systems traditions and sustainability-oriented systems thinking. 1. Classical Systems Foundations The manuscript has been revised to more explicitly acknowledge: General Systems Theory Operational Research traditions Contributions associated with systemic intervention and soft systems approaches We have strengthened the theoretical framing to clarify how the bibliometric findings relate to these foundational traditions. 2. Systems Thinking for Sustainability Following the reviewer’s recommendation, the emerging theme of “Systems Thinking for Sustainability” has been incorporated into the discussion. The manuscript now situates recent developments within sustainability-focused systems research and highlights its relevance to science-based education. 3. Reductionism vs. Holism We have expanded the discussion to clarify the epistemological contrast between reductionist scientific approaches and holistic systems perspectives, particularly in relation to science education. This addition strengthens the conceptual bridge between systems theory and science-based inquiry. 4. Educational Applications Additional clarification has been provided regarding the application of systems thinking in teaching contexts and its relationship to contemporary educational practice. We appreciate the reviewer’s insight in encouraging deeper theoretical integration. These revisions have strengthened the manuscript’s conceptual coherence and alignment with the broader systems tradition. View more View less Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. reply Respond Report a concern Weaver M. Peer Review Report For: Educating for Complexity: A Bibliometric Analysis of Systems Thinking in 21st-Century Science Education [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :937 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.185701.r423289) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-937/v1#referee-response-423289 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2025 SARASI V. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 29 Oct 2025 | for Version 1 VITA SARASI , Padjadjaran University, Bandung, Indonesia 0 Views copyright © 2025 SARASI V. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (1) Approved With Reservations info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions 1. Study Summary This manuscript examines the global development of systems thinking research within science education via a bibliometric analysis of Scopus-indexed publications spanning from 2014 to 2025. This analysis delineates publication trends, institutional collaborations, and thematic clusters pertinent to sustainability, STEM, and interdisciplinary learning. This topic is pertinent and aligns closely with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, specifically SDG 4 and SDG 13. While the paper effectively offers a descriptive overview of research dynamics, it lacks the application of systems thinking as an analytical framework. The study focuses on systems thinking rather than being conducted through its principles. 2. Advantages - The study examines a significant educational issue: the role of systems thinking in enhancing sustainability and complexity literacy within science education. - The manuscript exhibits a coherent structure, progressing logically from the introduction to the discussion, with well-defined objectives and a clear sequence of ideas. - The utilization of VOSviewer and Publish or Perish reflects a technical understanding of bibliometric visualization software. - The temporal scope (2014–2025) effectively captures the post-SDG transformation in educational research priorities, highlighting its global relevance. 3. Significant Limitations 3.1 Methodological Considerations The methodological design lacks adequate transparency. The analysis is based exclusively on Scopus and is limited to English-language publications, resulting in potential database and language bias. This limitation compromises representativeness, particularly in light of the increasing body of literature on systems thinking that is developing in non-English contexts. The search strategy, constrained to "Systems Thinking AND Science Education" and "Bibliometric Analysis AND Systems Thinking," is overly restrictive and excludes relevant conceptual variants such as complexity thinking, system dynamics, and learning systems. This limits the validity and completeness of the dataset. Additionally, essential analytical parameters are absent: there is no disclosure of inclusion/exclusion thresholds, normalization methods, or the clustering algorithms employed in VOSviewer. The absence of these details precludes independent replication of the study. The Data Availability Statement is deficient in metadata transparency, such as DOIs and record lists, which violates the open science practices highlighted by F1000Research. 3.2 Analytical and Epistemological Discrepancies Although bibliometric analysis is relevant for exploring systems thinking, it is not utilized epistemologically in this study. The authors regard systems thinking as a term rather than as a conceptual framework that informs interpretation. There is an absence of feedback loops, boundary definitions, and leverage points, which are fundamental principles of systems thinking. The interpretation is linear and descriptive rather than systemic and dynamic. Consequently, the study delineates the presence of research without addressing the interrelated framework of the research ecosystem. This creates a conceptual disconnect: the paper emphasizes the significance of systems thinking in education, yet the methodology fails to reflect systemic reasoning. This study is a bibliometric analysis focused on systems thinking, rather than a bibliometric study that employs systems thinking as its framework. 4. Targeted Observations The Introduction presents a compelling rationale; however, it would be enhanced by incorporating foundational theoretical perspectives on systems thinking, such as Meadows’ leverage points, Senge’s learning organization, or Sterman’s system dynamics. This would strengthen the conceptual framework significantly. The Methodology section should detail the comprehensive search protocol, encompassing Boolean expressions, the quantity of results obtained, the inclusion/exclusion criteria, and the settings of the software parameters. Justifying the selection of Scopus as the exclusive database and supplying at least partial metadata, such as titles or DOIs, would improve transparency. The assertion of a surge in publications post-2015 linked to the SDGs is plausible; however, it lacks statistical validation. Time-series or regression analysis may provide evidence for this relationship. Likewise, the claim regarding the rise in Southeast Asian participation necessitates quantitative or proportional evidence. Figures and tables require refinement, as several contain irrelevant journals (e.g., International Journal of Production Research), indicating a lack of adequate domain filtering. The Discussion section should extend beyond the mere description of co-occurrence clusters to illustrate the interdependence among variables, specifically how publication growth, international collaboration, and thematic diversification mutually reinforce one another. Causal-loop diagrams or dynamic overlays can effectively illustrate these relationships, aligning bibliometric findings with systems thinking methodology. The Conclusion must go beyond summarizing results to identify strategic leverage points for future development, including teacher training for systemic pedagogy, standardized systems-thinking assessment tools, and equitable global research collaboration. 5. Recommendations The manuscript provides a descriptive overview of systems thinking in education; however, it necessitates significant methodological and conceptual improvements to meet F1000Research, part of the Taylor & Francis Group standards. Necessary modifications comprise: Enhance the data sources, such as Web of Science and ERIC, to increase representativeness. Ensure comprehensive methodological transparency by detailing the search protocol, inclusion criteria, and software parameters. Enhance dataset filtering to eliminate non-educational entries. Integrate systems thinking through epistemological approaches such as causal reasoning, dynamic mapping, or feedback analysis. Enhance analysis to link publication trends with educational and sustainability results. 6. Comprehensive Assessment The paper shows conceptual relevance; however, it lacks sufficient epistemic depth. Bibliometric analysis serves as a valid and effective method for examining knowledge production systems; however, its systemic potential remains underutilized in this context. The existing version is characterized by a descriptive and linear structure, lacking relational and dynamic elements. The manuscript has the potential to significantly contribute to the fields of science education, sustainability, and systemic learning through methodological transparency, theoretical grounding, and the explicit application of systems thinking as both an object and a method of inquiry. Is the topic of the review discussed comprehensively in the context of the current literature? Partly Are all factual statements correct and adequately supported by citations? Yes Is the review written in accessible language? Yes Are the conclusions drawn appropriate in the context of the current research literature? Partly References 1. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC): Climate Change 2022 – Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. 2023. Publisher Full Text Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Systems Thinking, Sustainable Supply Chain Management, Renewable Energy Policy, Islamic Finance, and Educational Innovation I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (1) Author Response 24 Jan 2026 Sentot Rahardjo, Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, 57126, Indonesia We sincerely thank the reviewer for the thorough, insightful, and conceptually rich evaluation of our manuscript. We appreciate the recognition of the topic’s relevance to global sustainability agendas and the constructive critique regarding both methodological transparency and the epistemological application of systems thinking. The reviewer’s comments have been instrumental in strengthening the rigor, clarity, and conceptual depth of the revised manuscript. Regarding the study focus and analytical framework We acknowledge the reviewer’s important observation that the initial version of the manuscript examined systems thinking primarily as an object of analysis rather than employing systems thinking as an explicit analytical framework. In response, we have revised the Discussion and Conclusion sections to more explicitly interpret the bibliometric findings through key systems thinking principles, including interdependencies among publication growth, collaboration networks, and thematic diversification. While the study remains a bibliometric analysis by design, the revised interpretation now emphasizes relational patterns and systemic interactions within the research ecosystem, thereby aligning the analytical narrative more closely with systems thinking perspectives. Regarding methodological transparency and data sources We agree that methodological transparency is essential for bibliometric research, particularly within the open science standards emphasized by F1000Research. Accordingly, the Methodology section has been substantially expanded to include: a detailed description of the search protocol, including Boolean expressions, the temporal scope (2014–2025), document type and language criteria, and explicit inclusion and exclusion procedures. The choice of Scopus as the primary database has been justified based on its broad coverage of peer-reviewed education and interdisciplinary journals, as well as its compatibility with bibliometric software tools. We acknowledge the limitation related to database and language bias and have now explicitly discussed this issue in the Limitations subsection , noting that future studies may incorporate additional databases such as Web of Science and ERIC to enhance representativeness. Furthermore, we have improved the Data Availability Statement by clarifying the nature of the dataset, the variables extracted, and the procedures used for data cleaning and analysis. While full metadata sharing is constrained by database licensing terms, sufficient procedural detail has been provided to support transparency and reproducibility. Regarding search strategy and dataset completeness We acknowledge that the original search terms were restrictive. In the revised manuscript, the search strategy has been refined and clearly reported, and its conceptual boundaries have been explicitly justified. We also acknowledge that related constructs such as complexity thinking and system dynamics represent adjacent domains. These conceptual overlaps are now discussed in the Discussion section as directions for future research expansion rather than being retroactively incorporated into the dataset. Regarding analytical depth and interpretation We appreciate the reviewer’s critique regarding the initially descriptive nature of the analysis. In response, the Discussion section has been substantially revised to move beyond cluster description toward a more integrative interpretation. The revised discussion highlights how publication trends, international collaboration patterns, and thematic clusters mutually reinforce one another within the global systems thinking research landscape. Although causal-loop modeling and dynamic simulations fall outside the methodological scope of this bibliometric study, we have explicitly framed our findings as a foundation for future systems-based and mixed-methods investigations. Regarding figures, domain filtering, and conclusions We have carefully reviewed all figures and tables to improve domain relevance and clarity. Non-educational journal entries have been filtered more rigorously, and figure captions have been revised to better reflect their analytical purpose. The Conclusion section has been rewritten to avoid overgeneralization and now emphasizes strategic leverage points for future research and practice, including teacher professional development, assessment frameworks for systems thinking, and the need for more equitable global research collaboration. Final remarks We sincerely thank the reviewer for the depth and sophistication of the feedback. The revisions undertaken have significantly improved the manuscript’s methodological transparency, conceptual grounding, and analytical coherence. We believe the revised version now better reflects systems thinking not only as a research topic but also as a guiding perspective for interpreting bibliometric patterns in science education research. View more View less Competing Interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests. reply Respond Report a concern SARASI V. Peer Review Report For: Educating for Complexity: A Bibliometric Analysis of Systems Thinking in 21st-Century Science Education [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :937 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.185701.r423293) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-937/v1#referee-response-423293 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2025 Vuorio E. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 27 Oct 2025 | for Version 1 Emmi Vuorio , University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland 0 Views copyright © 2025 Vuorio E. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (1) Not Approved info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Summary of the article: The manuscript aims to conduct a bibliometric analysis of research on systems thinking in science education. The topic is timely and potentially valuable for understanding how systems thinking has evolved in educational research. However, the article currently falls short of meeting the methodological and reporting standards expected for a bibliometric study. Comments: Literature review and data collection: The description of the literature search is very brief and lacks essential details needed for transparency and replication. The authors mention constructing two “search artifacts” (“Systems Thinking” and “Science Education” and “Bibliometric Analysis” and “Systems Thinking”), but the Boolean logic and search scope remain unclear. The search terms appear overly broad, which may have led to a dataset not well aligned with the study’s purpose. The article does not specify inclusion/exclusion criteria, time range, or screening steps. The total number of records retrieved, screened, and analysed is not reported. Clarifying and justifying the search strategy, and documenting the process step by step, would greatly strengthen the scientific credibility of the paper. Referencing and use of sources: Several references are inaccurate, incomplete, or do not directly support the statements made. To improve reliability, the authors should check all references carefully, provide full citation details, and ensure that all claims are supported by appropriate sources. Quality of writing and structure: The overall readability and coherence need substantial improvement. The literature review reads more as a general overview than as an analytical synthesis of prior research. Careful language editing and structural revision would enhance the clarity and logical flow of the manuscript. Summary and recommendation: The article addresses an interesting and relevant topic but requires extensive revision to meet academic standards. To make it scientifically sound, the authors should clearly describe the literature search and selection procedure, correct and verify references, and substantially improve the language and structure. Is the topic of the review discussed comprehensively in the context of the current literature? Partly Are all factual statements correct and adequately supported by citations? No Is the review written in accessible language? Partly Are the conclusions drawn appropriate in the context of the current research literature? No Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Chemistry education I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to state that I do not consider it to be of an acceptable scientific standard, for reasons outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (1) Author Response 24 Jan 2026 Sentot Rahardjo, Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, 57126, Indonesia Author: Dwi Retno Sari, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Central Java, Indonesia Dear Reviewer, We sincerely appreciate the reviewer’s constructive comments and have undertaken substantial revisions to strengthen the methodological transparency, conceptual rigor, and overall clarity of the manuscript. First, regarding the literature review and data collection , we have significantly expanded the methodological description to ensure full transparency and replicability. The revised manuscript now presents the complete Boolean search strings, database fields, and filters applied in Scopus, along with a clear justification for selecting this database given its interdisciplinary relevance to systems thinking research. We have explicitly stated the time frame (2014–2025), defined the inclusion and exclusion criteria (peer-reviewed journal articles, English language, exclusion of conference papers and book chapters), and described each screening step in detail. Additionally, we now report the total number of records retrieved, screened, excluded, and ultimately analyzed (111 documents). These enhancements ensure that the literature search process is systematic, reproducible, and aligned with bibliometric research standards. Second, addressing the reviewer’s concern on referencing and use of sources , we have thoroughly verified all citations for accuracy, relevance, and completeness. Several references were corrected, refined, or replaced to ensure that every claim is supported by appropriate scholarly sources. We have also strengthened the theoretical grounding by aligning statements more closely with established literature in systems thinking and science education. These revisions contribute to greater reliability, coherence, and academic integrity within the manuscript. Third, in response to the comments about quality of writing and structure , we have conducted a comprehensive language and structural revision. The literature review has been reorganized to follow a more logical and analytical progression, beginning with foundational concepts of systems thinking and moving toward its specific relevance in science education. Redundant sentences have been removed, ambiguous expressions clarified, and transitions between sections improved. Moreover, the link between the bibliometric findings and the discussion has been made more explicit to enhance interpretative depth. These improvements collectively strengthen the manuscript’s readability, coherence, and scholarly contribution. We are grateful for the reviewer’s insightful suggestions, which have substantially improved the quality of the manuscript. We hope that these revisions address your concerns and improve the clarity and quality of the manuscript. Thank you once again for your thoughtful feedback. We look forward to your continued guidance View more View less Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. reply Respond Report a concern Vuorio E. Peer Review Report For: Educating for Complexity: A Bibliometric Analysis of Systems Thinking in 21st-Century Science Education [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2025, 14 :937 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.185701.r419992) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-937/v1#referee-response-419992 Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Adjust parameters to alter display View on desktop for interactive features Includes Interactive Elements View on desktop for interactive features Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Stay Updated Sign up for content alerts and receive a weekly or monthly email with all newly published articles Register with F1000Research Already registered? Sign in Not now, thanks close PLEASE NOTE If you are an AUTHOR of this article, please check that you signed in with the account associated with this article otherwise we cannot automatically identify your role as an author and your comment will be labelled as a “User Comment”. If you are a REVIEWER of this article, please check that you have signed in with the account associated with this article and then go to your account to submit your report, please do not post your review here. If you do not have access to your original account, please contact us . All commenters must hold a formal affiliation as per our Policies . The information that you give us will be displayed next to your comment. User comments must be in English, comprehensible and relevant to the article under discussion. We reserve the right to remove any comments that we consider to be inappropriate, offensive or otherwise in breach of the User Comment Terms and Conditions . Commenters must not use a comment for personal attacks. When criticisms of the article are based on unpublished data, the data should be made available. I accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions Please confirm that you accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions. Affiliation ✕ refresh Please enter your institution. Note: To add your institution or organisation, start typing the name and then select the correct name from the list. Where applicable, the name will appear in both the original language and in English. Do not paste in the name. If the name does not appear in the drop-down list, we will display the information you have entered. ✕ refresh Country/Region * USA UK Canada China France Germany Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory British Virgin Islands Brunei Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Democratic Republic of the Congo Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands Faroe Islands Federated States of Micronesia Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and Mcdonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kosovo (Serbia and Montenegro) Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Minor Outlying Islands of the United States Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands Antilles New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island North Korea North Macedonia Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Palestinian Territory Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Helena Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Is South Korea South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand The Gambia The Netherlands Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu UK USA Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United States Virgin Islands Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Vietnam Wallis and Futuna West Bank and Gaza Strip Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Please select your country/region. You must enter a comment. Competing Interests Please disclose any competing interests that might be construed to influence your judgment of the article's or peer review report's validity or importance. Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Please state your competing interests The comment has been saved. An error has occurred. Please try again. Cancel Post var lTitle = "Educating for Complexity: A Bibliometric...".replace("'", ''); var linkedInUrl = "http://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/14-937/v1" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle) + "&summary=" + encodeURIComponent('Read the article by '); var deliciousUrl = "https://del.icio.us/post?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/14-937/v1&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); var redditUrl = "http://reddit.com/submit?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/14-937/v1" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); linkedInUrl += encodeURIComponent('Retno Sari D et al.'); var offsetTop = /chrome/i.test( navigator.userAgent ) ? 4 : -10; var addthis_config = { ui_offset_top: offsetTop, services_compact : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_expanded : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_custom : [ { name: "LinkedIn", url: linkedInUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_linkedin.svg" }, { name: "Mendeley", url: "http://www.mendeley.com/import/?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/14-937/v1/mendeley", icon:"/img/icon/at_mendeley.svg" }, { name: "Reddit", url: redditUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_reddit.svg" }, ] }; var addthis_share = { url: "https://f1000research.com/articles/14-937", templates : { twitter : "Educating for Complexity: A Bibliometric Analysis of Systems.... Retno Sari D et al., published by " + "@F1000Research" + ", https://f1000research.com/articles/14-937/v1" } }; if (typeof(addthis) != "undefined"){ addthis.addEventListener('addthis.ready', checkCount); addthis.addEventListener('addthis.menu.share', checkCount); } $(".f1r-shares-twitter").attr("href", "https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=" + addthis_share.templates.twitter); $(".f1r-shares-facebook").attr("href", "https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=" + addthis_share.url); $(".f1r-shares-linkedin").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[0].url); $(".f1r-shares-reddit").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[2].url); $(".f1r-shares-mendelay").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[1].url); function checkCount(){ setTimeout(function(){ $(".addthis_button_expanded").each(function(){ var count = $(this).text(); if (count !== "" && count != "0") $(this).removeClass("is-hidden"); else $(this).addClass("is-hidden"); }); }, 1000); } close How to cite this report {{reportCitation}} Cancel Copy Citation Details $(function(){R.ui.buttonDropdowns('.dropdown-for-downloads');}); $(function(){R.ui.toolbarDropdowns('.toolbar-dropdown-for-downloads');}); $.get("/articles/acj/168515/185701") new F1000.Clipboard(); new F1000.ThesaurusTermsDisplay("articles", "article", "185701"); $(document).ready(function() { $( "#frame1" ).on('load', function() { var mydiv = $(this).contents().find("div"); var h = mydiv.height(); console.log(h) }); var tooltipLivingFigure = jQuery(".interactive-living-figure-label .icon-more-info"), titleLivingFigure = tooltipLivingFigure.attr("title"); tooltipLivingFigure.simpletip({ fixed: true, position: ["-115", "30"], baseClass: 'small-tooltip', content:titleLivingFigure + " " }); tooltipLivingFigure.removeAttr("title"); $("body").on("click", ".cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); var ref = $(this).attr("data-ref"); $(this).closest(".living-figure-list-container").find("#" + ref).fadeIn(200); }); $("body").on("click", ".close-cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); $(this).closest(".popup-window-wrapper").fadeOut(200); }); $(document).on("mouseup", function(e) { var metricsContainer = $(".article-metrics-popover-wrapper"); if (!metricsContainer.is(e.target) && metricsContainer.has(e.target).length === 0) { $(".article-metrics-close-button").click(); } }); var articleId = $('#articleId').val(); if($("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics) { $("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics(articleId, { articleMetricsView: true }); } }); var figshareWidget = $(".new_figshare_widget"); if (figshareWidget.length > 0) { window.figshare.load("f1000", function(Widget) { // Select a tag/tags defined in your page. In this tag we will place the widget. _.map(figshareWidget, function(el){ var widget = new Widget({ articleId: $(el).attr("figshare_articleId") //height:300 // this is the height of the viewer part. [Default: 550] }); widget.initialize(); // initialize the widget widget.mount(el); // mount it in a tag that's on your page // this will save the widget on the global scope for later use from // your JS scripts. This line is optional. //window.widget = widget; }); }); } close Error Close Add Reset F1000.MICROSERVICES.AFFILIATION = ''; $(document).ready(function () { $('.js-affiliations-form').each((index, form) => { new AffiliationForm({ formId: form.id, institutionErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-institution', departmentErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-department', placeSelector: '.js-add-comment-place', stateSelector: '.js-add-comment-state', zipCodeSelector: '.js-add-comment-zipcode', countrySelector: '.js-add-comment-country', countryErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-country', }); }); }); $(document).ready(function () { var reportIds = { "423296": 0, "452928": 0, "423297": 0, "419982": 0, "419983": 0, "419990": 0, "419991": 0, "419988": 0, "419989": 0, "419987": 0, "419984": 0, "419985": 0, "419992": 16, "416046": 0, "453678": 0, "416047": 0, "453679": 6, "453676": 0, "453677": 0, "453674": 0, "453675": 0, "453672": 0, "453673": 0, "416054": 0, "416055": 0, "416052": 0, "416053": 0, "416050": 0, "416051": 0, "416048": 0, "453680": 0, "416049": 0, "453681": 0, "423294": 0, "452926": 9, "423295": 0, "452927": 0, "423292": 0, "423293": 15, "423290": 0, "423291": 0, "423288": 0, "423289": 8, }; $(".referee-response-container,.js-referee-report").each(function(index, el) { var reportId = $(el).attr("data-reportid"), reportCount = reportIds[reportId] || 0; $(el).find(".comments-count-container,.js-referee-report-views").html(reportCount); }); var uuidInput = $("#article_uuid"), oldUUId = uuidInput.val(), newUUId = "cae1ff5e-99b5-4b93-ad4c-8f6cb17e3e50"; uuidInput.val(newUUId); $("a[href*='article_uuid=']").each(function(index, el) { var newHref = $(el).attr("href").replace(oldUUId, newUUId); $(el).attr("href", newHref); }); }); An innovative open access publishing platform offering rapid publication and open peer review, whilst supporting data deposition and sharing. Browse Gateways Collections How it Works Contact For Developers Cookie Notice Privacy Notice RSS Submit Your Research Follow us © 2012-2026 F1000 Research Ltd. ISSN 2046-1402 | Legal | Partner of Research4Life • CrossRef • ORCID • FAIRSharing R.templateTests.simpleTemplate = R.template(' $text $text $text $text $text '); R.templateTests.runTests(); var F1000platform = new F1000.Platform({ name: "f1000research", displayName: "F1000Research", hostName: "f1000research.com", id: "1", editorialEmail: "[email protected]", infoEmail: "[email protected]", usePmcStats: true }); $(function(){R.ui.dropdowns('.dropdown-for-authors, .dropdown-for-about, .dropdown-for-myresearch');}); // $(function(){R.ui.dropdowns('.dropdown-for-referees');}); $(document).ready(function () { if ($(".cookie-warning").is(":visible")) { $(".sticky").css("margin-bottom", "35px"); $(".devices").addClass("devices-and-cookie-warning"); } $(".cookie-warning .close-button").click(function (e) { $(".devices").removeClass("devices-and-cookie-warning"); $(".sticky").css("margin-bottom", "0"); }); $("#tweeter-feed .tweet-message").each(function (i, message) { var self = $(message); self.html(linkify(self.html())); }); $(".partner").on("mouseenter mouseleave", function() { $(this).find(".gray-scale, .colour").toggleClass("is-hidden"); }); }); Sign In Remember me Forgotten your password? Sign In Cancel Email or password not correct. Please try again Please wait... $(function(){ // Note: All the setup needs to run against a name attribute and *not* the id due the clonish // nature of facebox... $("a[id=googleSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("GOOGLE"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=facebookSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("FACEBOOK"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=orcidSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("ORCID"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); }); If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password. The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000. Email address not valid, please try again You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here . You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here . Code not correct, please try again Reset password Cancel Email us for further assistance. Server error, please try again. If your email address is registered with us, we will email you instructions to reset your password. If you think you should have received this email but it has not arrived, please check your spam filters and/or contact for further assistance. Please wait... Register $(document).ready(function () { signIn.createSignInAsRow($("#sign-in-form-gfb-popup")); $(".target-field").each(function () { var uris = $(this).val().split("/"); if (uris.pop() === "login") { $(this).val(uris.toString().replace(",","/")); } }); });