International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies(iJIM) – eISSN: 1865-7923 – Vol 16 No 13 (2022) Paper—Understanding Online Learning Readiness among University Students: A Bibliometric Analysis Understanding Online Learning Readiness among University Students: A Bibliometric Analysis https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v16i13.30605 Hassan Abuhassna(), Freed Awae, Kawthar Bayoumi, Diaya Uddeen Alzitawi, Ahmed H Alsharif, Noraffandy Yahaya Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM), Johor, Malaysia mahassan@utm.my Abstract—Many learners and educators have challenges accepting online education due to the non-traditional educational style. Additionally, many learn- ers are not familiar with utilizing online learning platforms for educational pur- poses due to their lack of readiness. Therefore, this research comprehensively examines online learning readiness by conducting a bibliometric analysis. This study expanded all research from 2010 to 2020 by utilizing the similarities visu- alization software (Vosviewer). A sum of 1371 publications were analyzed as documented in the Scopus database in July 2021, identifying the most compelling subjects covered by the journal. Findings demonstrate several significant research concerns (E-learning readiness, ICT education, Technology Acceptance Model TAM). Several emerging topics have been identified (Digital learning, online learning environments, self-directed learning). The research presents a roadmap for potential researchers, concentrating on critical areas where success is possible. Keywords—online learning readiness, online learning adoption, bibliometric analysis 1 Introduction Learners’ readiness toward online learning is considered one of the requirements to enhance their academic achievements [1]. However, unlike traditional classes, online learning does not ensure learners’ attendance. Therefore, it is hard to ascertain how students are concentrated during online learning settings [2][3][4][5][6]. Learners’ readiness toward online learning is essential in influencing learners’ willingness of involvement in class as well as the online learning quality. Consequently, investigate the crucial aspects that contribute to the online learning student’s revival. Learners’ readiness for online settings has been studied for decades [7]. Consequently, this research quantitatively analyzes online learning readiness publi- cations published between (2010–2020) to examine the research landscape comprehen- sively, particularly online learning readiness using Bibliometrics analysis. Bibliometrics analysis is a statistical method for quantifying and assessing the number of rising trends in a specific study area [8][9]. Bibliometrics analysis has been employed to assess academic outputs of numerous study disciplines (e.g., [10][11][12]). In addition, they have been intended to evaluate educational study disciplines. For instance, based upon 3914 Publications that were gathered from the Web of Science (WoS), [13][14] iJIM ‒ Vol. 16, No. 13, 2022 81 https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v16i13.30605 mailto:mahassan@utm.my Paper—Understanding Online Learning Readiness among University Students: A Bibliometric Analysis systematically analyzed the intellectual structure, trends, and status of online learning settings dialogue study by spotting the top journals as well as contributors, as well as illustrating the scientific associations. Chen et al. [15][16] similarly examined research papers in Computers and Education from a quantitative perspective regarding scientific collaborations, author profiles, and research topics. For this purpose, the objectives of this study are to analyze online learning publica- tions indexed in Scopus by using bibliometrics and visualization analysis. Moreover, in the current study, all data have been collected from Scopus, the world’s leading abstract and citation database of peer-reviewed research. Therefore, this research data included many leading journals in online learning and education technology resources. This analysis allowed us to see how the research interests of online learning have been altered over time. Additionally, this research visualized and investigated the scientific collaborations among top contributors in online education that were unavailable in prior studies. Exclusively, we intended to answer the following research questions: 1. What is the distribution of online learning readiness publications by years for the last decade? 2. What are the most relevant Journals and authors in online learning readiness research? 3. What are the most productive countries in the online learning readiness research area? 4. What are the primary research keywords for the last decade of online learning readiness? 2 Materials and methods This review aims to reveal the profile of the studies conducted for online learning readiness for the last decade. To achieve this aim, bibliometric and visualization methods were used together in the study. Moreover, Bibliometric analysis is based on following the studies on a specific subject and revealing the findings by analyzing these studies according to various characteristics [17]. Relevant publications in the Scopus database were included in the study to reach high-quality articles, excluding any conferences or proceedings. In the scan conducted on 17/07/2021, keywords were searched in the title, summary, or keyword sections by selecting the “Topic” option. English and open access articles were included in the study among the articles obtained after the search. “Online learning readiness” and “E-learning readiness” have been used as keywords and phrases that evoke them. Scopus has been used to obtain online learning readiness journals in this research since it includes intelligent tools to visualize, analyze, and track study output in different areas such as humanities, technology, and science [18] [19]. Additionally, to guarantee the relative significance of the analyzed publications to online learning readiness, we have carried out manual screening to exclude irrelevant publications following the criteria shown in Table 1. In this manner, 1371 publica- tions remained for additional analysis. Exclusion and inclusion criteria are presented in Table 1. In addition, the analytic research framework is illustrated in Figure 1. 82 http://www.i-jim.org Paper—Understanding Online Learning Readiness among University Students: A Bibliometric Analysis 3 The bibliometric analysis The bibliometric analysis method was also used in the study. With bibliometric anal- ysis, the most used keywords, the most cited journals, the most published journals, the journals that published the most studies on the subject, the countries that did the most studies on the subject, the publication cooperation between countries, the key- words used and the relationship between them, the most cited authors, the relation- ship between the authors, the journals that were jointly cited and the most published areas were examined. The VOSViewer software, one of the widely used programs in visualizing bibliometric networks, was used to reveal the network visualization in the analysis. This review is being carried out based on the following purposes. First, online learning has evolved into a compelling research area with growing research numbers. Thus, it is required to investigate the thematic structure of such a study area by utilizing an accurate machine learning method that could spontaneously examine sizeable, doc- umented literature data. Then, the current research is being carried out to help provide insights concerning what has been discussed and the trends in online learning. Fig. 1. Analytic framework of the study iJIM ‒ Vol. 16, No. 13, 2022 83 Paper—Understanding Online Learning Readiness among University Students: A Bibliometric Analysis Table 1. The inclusion and the exclusion criteria for data screening Inclusion criteria Online learning readiness, online learning platforms, online learning environments. Technology adoption, ICT adoption Students’ readiness, student’s satisfaction, student’s autonomy, students’ achievements Exclusion criteria Online learning in (medical and engineering fields) Conference papers, proceedings papers, nonindexed publications. 4 Findings The study aims to reveal the studies’ profile for online learning readiness for the last decade. The findings of this review were discussed based on the research questions. 4.1 Research question 1 What is the distribution of online learning readiness publications by years for the last decade? To address the first finding, an analysis was conducted of the publication year of the articles through the previous decade. It was seen that the papers were mainly pub- lished in the last couple of years; in the year 2020, a total number of 330 publications were published concerning online learning readiness; in the year 2021, a total number of 297 publications were published regarding online learning readiness, following by a total number of 209 publications in the year of 2019. The other publications were dis- tributed for the rest of the years, as shown in Figure 2. For example, the total number of online learning readiness journals for the year 2020 was expected as 330. 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 Years Years Fig. 2. Distribution of publications by years (2011–2020) 84 http://www.i-jim.org Paper—Understanding Online Learning Readiness among University Students: A Bibliometric Analysis 4.2 Research question 2 What are the most relevant Journals and authors in online learning readiness research? In the content analysis made for the most cited journals, “Total Publication,” “Total Citation,” “Cite Score of the journal,” “The most cited article,” “Times cited,” and “Publisher” was chosen as the analysis criteria as presented in Table 2. Table 2. The top 10 highly productive journals on online learning readiness in the years (2011–2021) Journal TP TC Cite Score (2020) The Most Cited Article (Reference) Times Cited Publisher Education and Information Technologies 3478 720 5.4 Exploring the critical challenges and factors influencing the E-learning system usage during the COVID-19 pandemic 65 Springer Nature International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning 1035 234 5.8 Designing a community of inquiry in online courses 10 Athabasca University Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education 208 380 2.2 Investigating Student Satisfaction in Online Learning: The Role of Student Interaction and Engagement in Distance Learning University 5 Anadolu University British Journal of Educational Technology 462 3247 7.6 Gamification of in-class activities in flipped classroom lectures 6 Wiley-Blackwell Educational Technology Research and Development 402 1549 5.0 Shifting digital, shifting context: (re)considering teacher professional development for online and blended learning in the COVID-19 era 5 Springer Nature Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 195 882 5.5 University students’ digital competence in three areas of the DigCom 2.1 model: A comparative study at three European universities 14 Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE) Distance Education 114 509 4.7 Online learning performance and satisfaction: do perceptions and readiness matter? 26 Taylor & Francis (Continued) iJIM ‒ Vol. 16, No. 13, 2022 85 Paper—Understanding Online Learning Readiness among University Students: A Bibliometric Analysis Journal TP TC Cite Score (2020) The Most Cited Article (Reference) Times Cited Publisher Journal of Computing in Higher Education 99 477 6.7 Blockchain-based approach to creating a model of trust in open and ubiquitous higher education 39 Springer Nature Education Sciences 1166 2662 2.1 E-learning critical success factors during the covid-19 pandemic: A comprehensive analysis of e-learning managerial perspectives 32 Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI) International Journal of Instruction 788 2262 207 EECN: Analysis, potency, a benefit for student’s knowledge and attitude to conserve mangroves and coral reefs 12 Gate Association for Teaching and Education Note: TP = Total Publications, TC = Total Citation. Table 2 shows that the most productive journal concerning online learning readiness was “Education and Information Technologies” with a total publications number 3478, and a total citation of 720, followed by “International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning” with a total publications number 1035, and a total citation of 234, in addition to “Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education” with a total publications number 208, and a total citation of 380. Moreover, the distribution of the most produc- tive journals concerning online learning readiness is presented accordingly in Table 2. On the other hand, RQ2 also investigated the most prolific authors in the online learning readiness research area. In the content analysis made for the prolific authors in the online learning readiness research area, “Author,” “Total Publications,” “h-index,” “Total citations,” “current affiliation,” and “country” were chosen as the analysis crite- ria as shown in Table 3. Table 3. List of the 15 most prolific authors in the online learning readiness research area Author Year of 1st Publication TP h-Index TC Current Affiliation Country 1 Horzum, Mehmet Bar 2008 37 14 556 Sakarya Üniversitesi, Sakarya, Turkey Turkey 2 Almaiah, Mohammed Amin 2014 40 13 500 King Faisal University, Suadi Arabia Suadi Arabia 3 Downing, Jillian J. 2012 17 6 138 University of Tasmania, Tasmania Australia 4 E. Dyment, Janet 2002 55 19 1096 Acadia University, Wolfville, Canada Canada 5 Stone, Cathy 2008 28 10 338 The Faculty of Business and Law, Perth, Australia Australia (Continued) Table 2. The top 10 highly productive journals on online learning readiness in the years (2011–2021) (Continued) 86 http://www.i-jim.org Paper—Understanding Online Learning Readiness among University Students: A Bibliometric Analysis Author Year of 1st Publication TP h-Index TC Current Affiliation Country 6 Bonk, Curtis Jay 1990 94 24 2250 Indiana University Bloomington, Bloomington, United States United States 7 Downing, Jillian J. 2012 17 6 138 University of Tasmania, Tasmania Australia 8 E. Dyment, Janet 2002 55 19 1096 Acadia University, Wolfville, Canada Canada 9 Liang, Jyhchong 1999 148 29 3284 National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan Taiwan 10 Sharma, Bibhya Nand 2003 82 14 484 University of the South Pacific, Suva, Fiji Fiji 11 Thang, Siewming 1997 49 11 328 HELP University, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Malaysia 12 Tsai, Chin Chung 1998 419 67 16660 National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan Taiwan 13 Yunus, M. M. 2007 186 16 1209 Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi, Malaysia Malaysia 14 Adams, Donnie 2014 26 9 167 Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Malaysia 15 Ankrah, Ebenezer 2016 6 13 2 University of Ghana, Accra, Ghana Ghana Note: TP = Total Publications, TC = Total Citation. Table 3 shows 15 prolific authors in the online learning readiness research area. Moreover, the most prolific author was “Tsai, Chin Chung” with a total number of pub- lications of 419, with the most h-index of 67, in addition to a total of 16660 citations, and the author is from Taiwan. Followed by “Liang, Jyhchong” with a total number of publications of 148, with an h-index of 29, in addition to a total of 3248 citations, and the author is from Taiwan as well. Followed by “Yunus, M. M.” with a total number of publications of 186, with an h-index of 16, in addition to a total of 1209 citations, and the author is from Malaysia. Furthermore, from an H-index standpoint, the top three remained the same as ranked by the publishing count. Moreover, other prolific authors in online learning readiness research area data were presented in Table 3. 4.3 Research question 2 What are the most productive countries in the online learning readiness research area? In the content analysis made for the most productive countries in the online learn- ing readiness research area, “country,” “Total Publications,” “and “most productive academic institution” were chosen as the analysis criteria as shown in Table 4 and Figure 3. Table 3. List of the 15 most prolific authors in the online learning readiness research area (Continued) iJIM ‒ Vol. 16, No. 13, 2022 87 Paper—Understanding Online Learning Readiness among University Students: A Bibliometric Analysis Table 4. List of the 15 most productive countries in the online learning readiness research area Rank Country TP Most Productive Academic Institution Rank Country TP Most Productive Academic Institution 1 USA 311 University of Virginia 9 Spain 44 IESE Business School 2 Turkey 152 Inönü University 10 Suadi Arabia 41 King Faisal University 3 Malaysia 109 Universiti Teknologi MARA UiTM 11 Iran 38 Islamic Azad University 4 Australia 93 University of Western Australia 12 Canada 37 University of Toronto 5 Indonesia 75 Sebelas Maret University 13 Russian federation 37 National Research University 6 United Kingdom 64 University College London, University of Exeter, University of Sussex 14 Hong Kong 32 The Education University of Hong Kong 7 South Africa 58 Cape Peninsula University of Technology 15 South Korea 32 KyungHee Cyber University 8 China 48 Hebei Finance University Note: TP = Total Publications. Table 4 and Figure 3 show the most 15 productive countries in the online learning readiness research area illustrate the topic distributions of the top prolific countries/ regions and establishments. From a country standpoint, most of the listed countries/ regions demonstrated a stable interest in all the research matters relating to online learning. In contrast, various countries/ regions showed a specific interest in specific trends. For example, the most productive country was the “united states,” with a total number of publications of 311 within the University of Virginia. They were followed by “Turkey” with a total number of publications of 152, within the Inonu University, and followed by “Malaysia” with a total number of publications of 109, within the Univer- sity Technology MARA UiTM. Moreover, other prolific, productive countries in online learning readiness research area data were presented in Table 4. 88 http://www.i-jim.org Paper—Understanding Online Learning Readiness among University Students: A Bibliometric Analysis Fig. 3. Analysis results of productive countries in online learning readiness research Figure 3 illustrates the analytical results of productive countries in online learn- ing readiness research. Thus, in contrast to countries/regions, institutes listed in the figure presented more interest in specific matters, the most productive country was “united states,” followed by “Turkey,” followed by “Malaysia” Moreover, Australia, Indonesia, United Kingdom, South Africa, China, Spain, Suadi Arabia, Iran, Canada, Russian Federation, Hong Kong, South Korea were listed as top 15 countries in the research field. Beginning With the analysis, it was evident that the countries/ regions from within the same institutions and continents from within the same countries/ regions with comparable study interests tend to collaborate more in the online learning research areas. 4.4 Research question 4 What are the primary research Keywords concerning online learning readiness for the last decade? For the bibliometric analysis of the most used keywords, “Co- occurrence” was selected as the analysis type, and “Authors keywords” was marked as the unit. In this context, 400 keywords have been identified from the data set, as shown in Figure 4. iJIM ‒ Vol. 16, No. 13, 2022 89 Paper—Understanding Online Learning Readiness among University Students: A Bibliometric Analysis Fig. 4. Analysis results of publications by keywords When Figure 4 is examined, the keywords used in the studies listed as “online learning readiness” (Occurences “Oc” = 74), “online education” (Oc = 46), “e-learn- ing” (Oc = 29), “online learning” (Oc = 25), “distance learning” (Oc = 24) and “ICT” (Oc = 18). These were followed by e-learning, education, ICT adoption, technology adoption, and technology education. When the keywords of the publications are exam- ined, it is seen that approximately 61% (n = 135) use words such as online learning and technology adoption. In addition, those keywords such as satisfaction, achievements, ICT, and education technology research are less preferred in bibliometric analysis. Fig. 5. Most cited journals (citation) 90 http://www.i-jim.org Paper—Understanding Online Learning Readiness among University Students: A Bibliometric Analysis When Figure 5 is examined, the first four journals with the most citations are listed, firstly, Education And Information Technologies (article title: Exploring the critical challenges and factors influencing the E-learning system usage during COVID-19 pandemic, citation = 65), secondly, International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning (article title: Designing a community of inquiry in online courses, citation = 10), thirdly, Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education (article title: Inves- tigating Student Satisfaction in Online Learning: The Role of Student Interaction and Engagement in Distance Learning University, citation = 5). Finally, British Journal of Educational Technology (article title: Gamification of in-class activities in flipped class- room lectures, citation = 6). The results of the Most cited journals (Co-Citation) analysis are presented in Figure 5 (Items = 86, Cluster = 7, Links = 1214 and TLS = 8667). 5 Discussions According to the 1734 research publications gathered from the Scopus database, this research review presents an overview of online learning readiness review utilizing content analysis and bibliometrics. This trend analysis of research review reveals an increasing interest in online learning readiness research as a promising field of study. Such an analysis of the publishing sources indicates that online learning readiness is mainly welcomed by interdisciplinary fields concentrating on the relationship of technologies and their implications in education in general. (See Figure 6). 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 USA Malaysia Indonesia South Africa Spain Iran Russian federation South Korea Conutries Distrubutions Total Publications Fig. 6. Country distribution and total publications The USA has contributed to roughly 30% of the analyzed literature, with Virginia University being the most productive educational institute. Moreover, Scientific cooperation analysis shows that countries/regions (e.g., the USA, Turkey, Malaysia, and Australia) presenting more interest in global cooperation are likely to evolve faster. Additionally, the collaborations among the same institutions or regions are much more significant. This study has identified the most related research topic in online learning and readiness. These topics include (online learning environments, ICT adoption, the utilization of technology in educational settings. Furthermore, the current study also iJIM ‒ Vol. 16, No. 13, 2022 91 Paper—Understanding Online Learning Readiness among University Students: A Bibliometric Analysis illustrates that the most tendencies and trends in online learning readiness research area, that could be divided into six major themes, (1) Readiness in Online learn- ing, (2) Self-efficacy towards Computer and Internet use, (3) Learners’ self-control, (4) Communication and Self-efficacy in online settings, (5) Self-directed Learning, (6) Learning Motivation. 6 Conclusion and implications The world is now changing the way of higher education from the traditional way to intelligent learning. To detect the research topics and their dynamics in the online learning readiness research area, this paper conducts analyses in 1732 online learning readiness publications using bibliometrics and content analysis. The distribution of the annual number of online learning readiness publications reflects this research field’s dramatically increasing interest. Such active research on online learning readiness indicates a promising future development trend. Interdisciplinary journals focusing on the connection between education and technology are involved in online learning readiness research. Virginia University was the most productive country and insti- tution publishing online learning readiness research. International collaborations can contribute to better scientific performance. Phrases such as “online learning readiness,” “technology adoption,” “ICT adoption,” “online learning environments,” and “E-learning platforms” are commonly used and mentioned in online learning readiness publications. Predominant research topics include technology integration, Blended learning, and educational technology research. Most subjects, including online education, Blended learning, students’ achievements, satisfaction, autonomy, and technology in education, have received significantly increasing attention from scholars devoted to the online learning research. 7 Limitation There are limitations to this research. Initially, the Scopus database only has been used for data collection. Thus, it does not cover all academic journals. Consequently, journals from another database, for example, the WoS, may not have been included in this analysis. Moreover, the most recent publications for 2021 in Scopus were disre- garded. Nonetheless, such limitations are not likely to impact the trends and patterns identified in this research. Additionally, only “online* learning*” and “E-Learning* readiness*” as search terms have been used in retrieving data. Though using precise search terms can result in a narrower data set. All future technologies which can be used for accomplishing online learning were considered, including “online* learning*,” “blinded* classroom*,” “learning analytics,” “educational technology*,” “education settings,” and “online education.” Consequently, using more precise search terms were used in this analysis (i.e., “online* learning*” and “E-learning* readiness*”), concentrating on the realization of online learning readiness instead of the prospective methods that could be involved. 92 http://www.i-jim.org Paper—Understanding Online Learning Readiness among University Students: A Bibliometric Analysis 8 References [1] Dangol, R., & Shrestha, M. (2019). Learning readiness and educational achievement among school students. The International Journal of Indian Psychology, 7, 467–476. https://doi. org/10.25215/0702.056 [2] Abuhassna, H., Al-Rahmi, W. M., Yahya, N. et al. (2020). Development of a new model on utilizing online learning platforms to improve students’ academic achievements and satisfac- tion. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17, 38. https:// doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-00216-z [3] Abuhassna, H., Busalim, A. H., Mamman, B., Yahaya, N., Megat Zakaria, M. A. Z., Al Maatouk, Q., & Awae, F. (2022). From student’s experience: does e-learning course structure influenced by learner’s prior experience, background knowledge, autonomy, and dialogue. Contemporary Educational Technology, 14(1), ep338. https://doi.org/10.30935/ cedtech/11386 [4] Masrom, M. B., Busalim, A. H., Abuhassna, H. et al. (2021). Understanding students’ behav- ior in online social networks: a systematic literature review. International Journal of Educa- tional Technology in Higher Education, 18(6), https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00240-7 [5] Li, X., & Yang, X. (2016). Effects of learning styles and interest on concentration and achievement of students in mobile learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 54(7), 922–945. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633116639953 [6] Cheon, J., Lee, S., Crooks, S. M., & Song, J. (2012). An investigation of mobile learning readiness in higher education based on the theory of planned behavior. Computers & Educa- tion, 59(3), 1054–1064. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.04.015 [7] Warner, D., Christie, G., & Choy, S. (1998). Readiness of VET clients for flexible delivery including online learning. Brisbane: Australian National Training Authority. Retrieved from http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/38801/20031209/www.flexiblelearning.net.au/research/ ReadinessoftheVETsectorforFDCUR.rtf on July 20, 2021 [8] Hao, T., Chen, X., Li, G., & Yan, J. (2018). A bibliometric analysis of text mining in medical research. Soft Computing, 22(23), 7875–7892. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-018-3511-4 [9] Mustapha, I., Khan, N., Qureshi, M. I., Harasis, A. A., & Van, N. T. (2021). Impact of industry 4.0 on healthcare: a systematic literature review (SLR) from the last decade. Inter- national Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies (iJIM), 15(18), 116–128. https://doi. org/10.3991/ijim.v15i18.25531 [10] Van, N. T., Abbas, A. F., Abuhassna, H., Awae, F., & Dike, D. (2021). Digital readiness for social educators in health care and online learning during covid-19 pandemic: a bibliometric analysis. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies (iJIM), 15(18), 104–115. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v15i18.25529 [11] Alsharif, A. H., Salleh, N. Z. M., Baharun, R., Alsharif, Y. H., & Abuhassna, H. (2021). A bibliometric analysis of neuromarketing: current status, development, and future direc- tions. International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting Finance and Management Sciences, 11(3), 670-689. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARAFMS/v11-i3/11673 [12] Chen, X., Wang, S., Tang, Y., & Hao, T. (2019). A bibliometric analysis of event detec- tion in social media. Online Information Review, 43(1), 29–52. https://doi.org/10.1108/ OIR-03-2018-0068 [13] Song, Y., Chen, X., Hao, T., Liu, Z., & Lan, Z. (2019). Exploring two decades of research on classroom dialogue by using bibliometric analysis. Computers & Education, 137, 12–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.04.002 iJIM ‒ Vol. 16, No. 13, 2022 93 https://doi.org/10.25215/0702.056 https://doi.org/10.25215/0702.056 https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-00216-z https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-00216-z https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/11386 https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/11386 https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00240-7 https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633116639953 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.04.015 http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/38801/20031209/www.flexiblelearning.net.au/research/ReadinessoftheVETsectorforFDCUR.rtf http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/38801/20031209/www.flexiblelearning.net.au/research/ReadinessoftheVETsectorforFDCUR.rtf https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-018-3511-4 https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v15i18.25531 https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v15i18.25531 https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v15i18.25529 https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARAFMS/v11-i3/11673 https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-03-2018-0068 https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-03-2018-0068 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.04.002 Paper—Understanding Online Learning Readiness among University Students: A Bibliometric Analysis [14] Qureshi, M. I., Khan, N., Raza, H., Imran, A., & ismail, F. (2021). Digital technologies in education 4.0. Does it enhance the effectiveness of learning? A systematic literature review. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies (iJIM), 15(4), 31–47. https://doi. org/10.3991/ijim.v15i04.20291 [15] Chen, X., Chen, J., Cheng, G., & Gong, T. (2020). Topics and trends in artificial intelli- gence assisted human brain research. PLoS ONE, 15(4), e0231192. https://doi.org/10.1371/ journal.pone.0231192 [16] Sikandar, H., Vaicondam, Y., Parveen, S., Khan, N., & Qureshi, M. I. (2021). Bibliometric analysis of telemedicine and e-health literature. International Journal of Online and Biomed- ical Engineering (iJOE), 17(12), 52–69. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijoe.v17i12.25483 [17] Marti-Parreno, J., Mendez-Ibanez, E., & Alonso-Arroyo, A. (2016). The use of gamifica- tion in education: a bibliometric and text mining analysis. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32(6), 663–676. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12161 [18] Agapiou, A., & Lysandrou, V. (2015). Remote sensing archaeology: tracking and mapping evolution in European scientific literature from 1999 to 2015. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports, 4, 192–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2015.09.010 [19] Tober, M. (2011). PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus, or Google Scholar-Which is the best search engine for an effective literature research in laser medicine? Medical Laser Application, 26(3), 139–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mla.2011.05.006 9 Authors Hassan Abuhassna, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM), Johor, Malaysia. Freed Awae, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM), Johor, Malaysia. Kawthar Bayoumi, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM), Johor, Malaysia. Diaya Uddeen Alzitawi, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM), Johor, Malaysia. Ahmed H Alsharif, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM), Johor, Malaysia. Noraffandy Yahaya, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM), Johor, Malaysia. Article submitted 2022-03-01. Resubmitted 2022-04-21. Final acceptance 2022-04-21. Final version published as submitted by the authors. 94 http://www.i-jim.org https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v15i04.20291 https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v15i04.20291 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231192 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231192 https://doi.org/10.3991/ijoe.v17i12.25483 https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12161 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2015.09.010 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mla.2011.05.006