A Systematic Review of Using Social and Epistemic Network Analysis Methods in Community of Inquiry Research

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v27i3.9047

Keywords:

social network analysis, epistemic network analysis, community of inquiry, systematic review

Abstract

With the increasing application of learning analytics in online learning communities, network analysis methods have emerged as powerful and efficient tools for deepening our understanding of collaborative learning processes, especially within the community of inquiry (CoI) framework, offering insights that extend beyond the examination of interaction patterns. This systematic review synthesizes findings from 43 empirical studies, with a focus on the application of social and epistemic network analysis methods (SNA and ENA) in CoI research in higher education contexts. Key findings highlight the value of SNA and ENA in investigating interaction patterns, refining CoI theory, examining community formation and evolution, analyzing discourse and knowledge construction, tracing the development of CoI presences, and identifying SNA measures relevant to CoI presences. This review also identifies the current challenges and opportunities in using SNA and ENA, as well as the potential for integrating both methods in future CoI research. By revealing both the strengths and limitations of existing studies, this review offers actionable implications for researchers, educators, and instructional designers aiming to enhance the design and analysis of online learning communities.

Author Biographies

Liu Dong, Department of Curriculum and Instruction, Purdue University

Liu Dong is a PhD candidate in Learning Design and Technology program at Purdue University. Her research examines the integration of learning analytics and artificial intelligence to support individual and collaborative learning in online environments, with a particular focus on student interaction and knowledge construction.

Victoria L. Lowell, Department of Curriculum and Instruction, Purdue University

Dr. Victoria Lowell is a Clinical Professor in the Learning Design and Technology program at Purdue University. Prior to her position at Purdue University, Dr. Lowell was the Director of Professional Licensure Programs at Regent University. Dr. Lowell engages in research blended and online learning through the development and integration of instructional methods and technologies (virtual reality, AI, etc.), for collaborative, situated, experiential, and authentic learning experiences.

Chi-Jia Hsieh, Department of Curriculum and Instruction, Purdue University

Chi-Jia Hsieh is a PhD student in the Learning Design and Technology program at Purdue University. Her research interests focus on instructional design, specifically aimed at enhancing students' wellness, sense of belonging, and identity development.

References

*Alwafi, E. M. (2022). Designing an online discussion strategy with learning analytics feedback on the level of cognitive presence and student interaction in an online learning community. Online Learning, 26(1), 80–92. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v26i1.3065

Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v5i2.1875

Arbaugh, J. B., Cleveland-Innes, M., Diaz, S. R., Garrison, D. R., Ice, P., Richardson, J. C., & Swan, K. P. (2008). Developing a community of inquiry instrument: Testing a measure of the community of inquiry framework using a multi-institutional sample. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(3–4), 133–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2008.06.003

*Ba, S., Hu, X., Stein, D., & Liu, Q. (2023). Assessing cognitive presence in online inquiry‐based discussion through text classification and epistemic network analysis. British Journal of Educational Technology, 54(1), 247–266. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13285

*Ba, S., Hu, X., Stein, D., & Liu, Q. (2024). Anatomizing online collaborative inquiry using directional epistemic network analysis and trajectory tracking. British Journal of Educational Technology, 55(5), 2173–2191. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13441

*Castellanos-Reyes, D., Richardson, J. C., & Maeda, Y. (2024). The evolution of social presence: A longitudinal exploration of the effect of online students’ peer-interactions using social network analysis. The Internet and Higher Education, 61, Article 100939. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2024.100939

Cela, K. L., Sicilia, M. Á., & Sánchez, S. (2015). Social network analysis in e-learning environments: A preliminary systematic review. Educational Psychology Review, 27, 219–246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-014-9276-0

Dong, L., Hsieh, C.-J., Watson, S. L., Yu, J. H., & Lowell, V. L. (2025). Revisiting the interrelationships between social and cognitive presences in asynchronous online courses: Insights from epistemic network analysis. Online Learning, 29(3), 417–444. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v29i3.4672

*Elmoazen, R., Saqr, M., Hirsto, L., & Tedre, M. (2024). Capturing temporal pathways of collaborative roles: A multilayered analytical approach using community of inquiry. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 20, 41–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-024-09431-6

Elmoazen, R., Saqr, M., Tedre, M., & Hirsto, L. (2022). A systematic literature review of empirical research on epistemic network analysis in education. IEEE Access, 10, 17330–17348. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3149812

*Eryilmaz, E., Thoms, B., & Ahmed, Z. (2022). Cluster analysis in online learning communities: A text mining approach. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 51(1), Article 32. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.05132

Fan, O., & Dai, X. (2021). Using a three-layered social-cognitive network analysis framework for understanding online collaborative discussions. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 38(1), 164–181. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.7166

*Farrow, E., Moore, J., & Gašević, D. (2021). Ordering effects in a role-based scaffolding intervention for asynchronous online discussions. In I. Roll, D. McNamara, S. Sosnovsky, R. Luckin, & V. Dimitrova (Eds.), International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education. AIED 2021 (pp. 125–136). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78292-4_11

*Fathali, S. (2024). Social and cognitive presence in a community of inquiry: An epistemic network analysis of CALL students’ interactions via NowComment. System, 121, Article 103233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2024.103233

*Ferreira, M. A. D., Ferreira Mello, R., Kovanović, V., Nascimento, A., Lins, R. D., & Gašević, D. (2022). NASC: Network analytics to uncover socio-cognitive discourse of student roles. In A. F. Wise, R. Martinez-Maldonado, & I. Hilliger (Chairs), LAK22: The 12th International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (pp. 415–425). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3506860.3506978

*Ferreira, M. A. D., Ferreira Mello, R., Lins, R. D., & Gašević, D. (2021). Analytics of emerging and scripted roles in online discussions: An epistemic network analysis approach. In I. Roll, D. McNamara, S. Sosnovsky, R. Luckin, & V. Dimitrova (Eds.), International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education. AIED 2021 (pp. 156–161). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78270-2_28

*Ferreira, M. A. D., Rolim, V., Ferreira Mello, R., Lins, R. D., Chen, G., & Gašević, D. (2020). Towards automatic content analysis of social presence in transcripts of online discussions. In M. Scheffel, V. Kovanović, N. Pinkwart, & K. Verbert (Chairs), LAK20: Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge (pp. 141–150). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3375462.3375495

*Ferreira Mello, R., & Gašević, D. (2019). What is the effect of a dominant code in an epistemic network analysis? In B. Eagan, M. Misfeldt, & A. Siebert-Evenstone (Eds.), Advances in Quantitative Ethnography: ICQE 2019 (pp. 66–76). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33232-7_6

*Ferreira Mello, R., Kovanović, V., Gašević, D., & Rolim, V. (2018). Towards combined network and text analytics of student discourse in online discussions. In C. Rosé, R. Martínez-Maldonado, U. Hoppe, R. Luckin, M. Mavrikis, K. Porayska-Pomsta, B. McLaren, & B. du Boulay (Eds.), International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education. AIED 2018 (pp. 111–126). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93843-1_9

*Galikyan, I., & Admiraal, W. (2019). Students’ engagement in asynchronous online discussion: The relationship between cognitive presence, learner prominence, and academic performance. The Internet and Higher Education, 43, Article 100692. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2019.100692

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 7–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923640109527071

Garrison, D. R., & Arbaugh, J. B. (2007). Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues, and future directions. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(3), 157–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2007.04.001

Garrison, D. R., Cleveland-Innes, M., Koole, M., & Kappelman, J. (2006). Revisiting methodological issues in transcript analysis: Negotiated coding and reliability. The Internet and Higher Education, 9(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2005.11.001

Gašević, D., Joksimović, S., Eagan, B. R., & Shaffer, D. W. (2019). SENS: Network analytics to combine social and cognitive perspectives of collaborative learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 92, 562–577. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.07.003

*Iqbal, S., Swiecki, Z., Joksimović, S., Ferreira Mello, R., Aljohani, N., Ul Hassan, S., & Gašević, D. (2022). Uncovering associations between cognitive presence and speech acts: A network-based approach. In A. F. Wise, R. Martínez-Maldonado, & I. Hilliger (Chairs), LAK22: 12th International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference (pp. 315–325). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3506860.3506908

*Jan, S. K. (2018). Identifying online communities of inquiry in higher education using social network analysis. Research in Learning Technology, 26, Article 2064. https://doi.org/10.25304/rlt.v26.2064

*Jan, S. K., & Vlachopoulos, P. (2018). Influence of learning design of the formation of online communities of learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 19(4). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v19i4.3620

*Jan, S. K., & Vlachopoulos, P. (2019). Social network analysis: A framework for identifying communities in higher education online learning. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 24(4), 621–639. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-018-9375-y

Jan, S., Vlachopoulos, P., & Parsell, M. (2019). Social network analysis and online learning communities in higher education: A systematic literature review. Online Learning, 23(1). https://doi.org/10.24059/OLJ.V23I1.1398

*Jimoyiannis, A., & Tsiotakis, P. (2017). Beyond students’ perceptions: Investigating learning presence in an educational blogging community. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 9(1), 129–146. https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-06-2015-0046

*Jo, I., Park, Y., & Lee, H. (2017). Three interaction patterns on asynchronous online discussion behaviours: A methodological comparison. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 33(2), 106–122. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12168

Kaliisa, R., Rienties, B., Mørch, A. I., & Kluge, A. (2022). Social learning analytics in computer-supported collaborative learning environments: A systematic review of empirical studies. Computers and Education Open, 3, Article 100073. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2022.100073

Kozan, K., & Richardson, J. C. (2014). Interrelationships between and among social, teaching, and cognitive presence. The Internet and Higher Education, 21, 68–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.10.007

*Lim, J. (2023). Exploring the relationships between interaction measures and learning outcomes through social network analysis: The mediating role of social presence. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), Article 14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00384-8

*Lim, J. (2024). Students’ interaction, satisfaction and cognitive presence in online discussions. Educational Technology & Society, 27(1), 35–49. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48754840

Liu, Z., Zhang, N., Peng, X., Liu, S., Yang, Z., Peng, J., Su, Z., & Chen, J. (2021). Exploring the relationship between social interaction, cognitive processing and learning achievements in a MOOC discussion forum. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 60(1), 132–169. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331211027300

*Moraes, M., Folkestad, J., & McKenna, K. (2021). Using conversation analysis and epistemic network analysis to understand social presence in an asynchronous online discussion. In A. R. Ruis & S. B. Lee (Eds.), Second International Conference on Quantitative Ethnography: Conference proceedings supplement (p. 15–18). International Society for Quantitative Ethnography. https://www.qesoc.org/images/pdf/ICQE20_Proceedings_Supplement_Final_web.pdf

Moore, M. G. (1989). Editorial: Three types of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923648909526659

*Norz, L.-M., Dornauer, V., Hackl, W. O., & Ammenwerth, E. (2023). Measuring social presence in online-based learning: An exploratory path analysis using log data and social network analysis. The Internet and Higher Education, 56, Article 100894. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2022.100894

*Norz, L.-M., Kaczkó, É., Netzer, M., & Ammenwerth, E. (2024). Quantifying social presence in online-based learning: A statistical and pedagogical analysis of indicators from social network analysis. Online Learning, 28(4), 414–467. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v28i4.4134

*Oh, E. G., Huang, W.-H. D., Hedayati Mehdiabadi, A., & Ju, B. (2018). Facilitating critical thinking in asynchronous online discussion: Comparison between peer-and instructor-redirection. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 30, 489–509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-018-9180-6

Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372(71). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71

*Papanikolaou, K., Tzelepi, M., Moundridou, M., & Petroulis, I. (2020). Employing social network analysis to enhance community learning. In V. Kumar & C. Troussas (Eds.), Intelligent tutoring systems. 16th international conference: ITS 2020 (pp. 342–352). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-49663-0_41

*Rolim, V., Ferreira Mello, R., Lins, R. D., & Gǎsević, D. (2019). A network-based analytic approach to uncovering the relationship between social and cognitive presences in communities of inquiry. The Internet and Higher Education, 42, 53–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2019.05.001

*Rolim, V., Ferreira Mello, R., Kovanović, V., & Gašević, D. (2019). Analysing social presence in online discussions through network and text analytics. In IEEE 19th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies. ICALT 2019 (pp. 163–167). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICALT.2019.00058 .

*Sadaf, A., & Olesova, L. (2020). Exploring the relationship between interaction and the structure of questions in online discussions using learning analytics. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 23(1), 46–60. https://doi.org/10.2478/eurodl-2020-0004

*Sadaf, A., Olesova, L., & Choi, H. (2024). Empowering learning networks: Insights from social network analysis in inquiry-based discussions. Online Learning, 28(4), 200–227. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v28i4.4635

Saqr, M., & Alamro, A. (2019). The role of social network analysis as a learning analytics tool in online problem based learning. BMC Medical Education, 19(1), Article 160. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1599-6

*Satar, H. M., & Akcan, S. (2018). Pre-service EFL teachers’ online participation, interaction, and social presence. Language Learning & Technology, 22(1), 157–183. https://dx.doi.org/10125/44586

*Scianna, J., Woodard, M., Galarza, B., Lee, S., Kaliisa, R., & Quesada, H. V. (2022). Community at a distance: Understanding student interactions in course-based online discussion forums. In C. Damşa & A. Barany (Eds.), Advances in Quantitative Ethnography. ICQE 2022 (pp. 270–284). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-31726-2_19

Shaffer, D. W., Collier, W., & Ruis, A. R. (2016). A tutorial on epistemic network analysis: Analyzing the structure of connections in cognitive, social, and interaction data. Journal of Learning Analytics, 3(3), 9–45. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2016.33.3

Shea, P., & Bidjerano, T. (2009). Community of inquiry as a theoretical framework to foster “epistemic engagement” and “cognitive presence” in online education. Computers & Education, 52(3), 543–553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.10.007

Shea, P., & Bidjerano, T. (2010). Learning presence: Towards a theory of self-efficacy, self-regulation, and the development of a communities of inquiry in online and blended learning environments. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1721–1731. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.07.017

*Shea, P., Hayes, S., Uzuner-Smith, S., Gozza-Cohen, M., Vickers, J., & Bidjerano, T. (2014). Reconceptualizing the community of inquiry framework: An exploratory analysis. The Internet and Higher Education, 23, 9–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2014.05.002

*Shea, P., Hayes, S., Uzuner Smith, S., Vickers, J., Bidjerano, T., Gozza-Cohen, M., Jian, S.-B., Pickett, A. M., Wilde, J., & Tseng, C.-H. (2013). Online learner self-regulation: Learning presence viewed through quantitative content and social network analysis. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 14(3), 427–461. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v14i3.1466

*Shea, P., Hayes, S., Vickers, J., Gozza-Cohen, M., Uzuner, S., Mehta, R., Valchova, A., & Rangan, P. (2010). A re-examination of the community of inquiry framework: Social network and content analysis. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(1–2), 10–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.11.002

Siebert-Evenstone, A. L., Irgens, G. A., Collier, W., Swiecki, Z., Ruis, A. R., & Shaffer, D. W. (2017). In search of conversational grain size: Modeling semantic structure using moving stanza windows. Journal of Learning Analytics, 4(3), 123–139. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2017.43.7

Swiecki, Z., & Shaffer, D. W. (2020). iSENS: An integrated approach to combining epistemic and social network analyses. In M. Scheffel, V. Kovanović, N. Pinkwart, & K. Verbert (Chairs), The Tenth International Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge (pp. 305–313). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3375462.3375505

*Tirado-Morueta, R., Hernando, Á., & Aguaded, J. I. (2015). The effect of centralization and cohesion on the social construction of knowledge in discussion forums. Interactive Learning Environments, 23(3), 293–316. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2012.745437

*Tirado-Morueta, R., Maraver-López, P., Pérez-Rodríguez, A., & Hernando-Gómez, Á. (2020). Exploring social network structure patterns suitable to the community of inquiry model moderated by the task. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 58(2), 319–342. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633119845695

*Wang, Y., & Liu, Q. (2020). Effects of online teaching presence on students’ interactions and collaborative knowledge construction. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 36(3), 370–382. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12408

Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge University Press.

*Wicks, D., Craft, B. B., Lee, D., Lumpe, A., Henrikson, R., Baliram, N., Bian, X., Mehlberg, S., & Wicks, K. (2015). An evaluation of low versus high collaboration in online learning. Online Learning, 19(4), 67–87. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v19i4.552

*Williams-Dobosz, D., Azevedo, R. F. L., Jeng, A., Thakkar, V., Bhat, S., Bosch, N., & Perry, M. (2021). A social network analysis of online engagement for college students traditionally underrepresented in STEM. In M. Scheffel, N. Dowell, S. Joksimović, & G. Siemens (Chairs), LAK21: The 11th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference (pp. 207–215). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3448139.3448159

*Wu, Q., Koszalka, T. A., & Niu, Z. (2022). Exploring levels and patterns of social presence in asynchronous online discussions: A longitudinal study. Distance Learning, 19(4), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1108/DL-05-2023-0001

*Yen, C.-J., Tu, C.-H., Tankari, M., Özkeskin, E. E., Harati, H., & Miller, A. (2022). A predictive study of students’ social presence and their interconnectivities in the social network interaction of online discussion board. Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching, 5(1), 27–39. https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2022.5.1.13

Downloads

Published

2026-08-07

How to Cite

Dong, L., Lowell, V. L., & Hsieh, C.-J. (2026). A Systematic Review of Using Social and Epistemic Network Analysis Methods in Community of Inquiry Research. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 27(3), 340–361. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v27i3.9047

Issue

Vol. 27 No. 3 (2026)

Section

Literature Reviews

License

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. The copyright for all content published in IRRODL remains with the authors.

This copyright agreement and usage license ensure that the article is distributed as widely as possible and can be included in any scientific or scholarly archive.

You are free to

  • Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
  • Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.

The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms below:

  • No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.