Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Bibliometric analysis reveals sustained thematic evolution in postretirement employment literature, highlighting geographical concentration and the need for multi-level research frameworks.
This study provides a systematic bibliometric analysis of the indexed postretirement/bridge employment research stream, aiming to map its structural configuration, thematic organization, and temporal evolution. Using data from the Web of Science Core Collection, 151 peer-reviewed journal articles published between 1993 and 2025 were identified through PRISMA-based screening. Bibliometric techniques—including keyword co-occurrence mapping, collaboration analysis, and temporal overlay visualization—were applied to examine publication trends, disciplinary distribution, and thematic clustering. The results indicate sustained growth in scholarly output after 2010 and a strongly interdisciplinary profile, with prominent contributions from psychology, management, and gerontology. Six thematic clusters organize the indexed network around a stable conceptual core anchored in bridge employment terminology, alongside streams addressing motivational determinants, health and demographic heterogeneity, organizational practices, decision-making processes, and institutional contexts. Temporal overlay analysis indicates cumulative thematic layering rather than paradigmatic rupture, with newer topics integrated into established network hubs. Despite expansion and diversification, the indexed literature appears geographically concentrated and unevenly integrated across analytical levels in the co-occurrence network. The present study should be read as a structural diagnostic of the indexed postretirement/bridge employment research stream, rather than as a definitive assessment of the broader extended-working-life literature. On this basis, it offers a transparent foundation for future multi-level theoretical development and broader contextual expansion in research on later-life employment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Thi To Nga Nguyen (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: