Unwrap citation count, Altmetric Attention Score and Mendeley readership status of highly cited articles in the top-tier LIS journals

2020 ◽  
Vol 69 (8/9) ◽  
pp. 653-664
Author(s):  
Yingqi Tang ◽  
Hungwei Tseng ◽  
Charlcie Vann
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Citation Count ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Research Impact ◽  
Impact Factors ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Arts And Humanities ◽  
The Impact

Purpose The purpose of the study is to use a multidimensional perspective on the analysis of scholarly articles published in the top-tier Library and Information Science (LIS) journals. The relationships between the impact factors (Altmetric attention score [AAS], citation count and Mendeley readership) were analyzed, and reader profiles were characterized and studied. Design/methodology/approach This paper examined citation count, AAS and Mendeley readership of the most cited articles published in the top-tier LIS journals – The Journal of Academic Librarianship, Government Information Quarterly and Library and Information Science Research. A total of 61 articles were analyzed. Data were recorded on an Excel spreadsheet and exported to the statistical software package SPSS 18.0 for Windows to perform the descriptive and correlation analysis. Findings This study suggests that Mendeley readership and AAS could be used as supplemental measurements for assessing the impact of a publication or author in the LIS. AAS and Mendeley readership are positively correlated with citation count, and the correlation between Mendeley readership and citation count was stronger than AAS and citation count. Librarians are dominant readers of the top-tier LIS journals, followed by social sciences, computer science and arts and humanities professions. Originality/value This study introduces two newly launched metrics for measuring the research impact factor and discusses how they correlated with citation count. Moreover, the study details the spectrum of Altmetric for discovering readership of LIS top-tier journals. To the best of authors’ knowledge, this is the first study that presents the spectrum of AAS and Mendeley readership of the most cited articles published in top-tier of LIS journals. The study reveals an alternative way of measuring LIS publication’s impact factor that enables researchers, librarians, administrators, publishers and other stakeholders in LIS to assess the influence of a publication from another angle.

Effects of gender in library and information science research

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 488-503 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sumeer Gul ◽  
Tariq Ahmad Shah ◽  
Samir N. Hamade ◽  
Rabiya Mushtaq ◽  
Ikrah Koul
Keyword(s):  
Information Science ◽  
Citation Count ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
Electronic Library ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Female Authors ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Status

Purpose This study aims to showcase the effect of gender in the field of library and information science. Design/methodology/approach Research and review articles published from 2005 through 2014 in The Electronic Library, a prominent journal in the field of Library and Information Science, were examined from the perspective of authors’ gender. Influence of gender was assessed with respect to at individual and collaborative levels, quality in terms of citedness and citation count, and receipt of research grants. Findings There has been an increase in the proportion of male authors over the years with a resulting decline in female authors. Male authors are more productive as teachers, while females contribute more as working professionals or while they peruse their academic/research programmes. Though the productivity in collaborative works has increased in all gender combinations, it is more prominent when authors of opposite gender team up. No significant difference is observed in the number of national or international works produced in different collaborative authorship patterns. There is no difference in the number of male and female authors in male–female collaborative works. Works sponsored by grants are produced more frequently in groups comprising male–female or male–male members. No significant difference is observed in the number of cited or uncited works produced in different authorship patterns. The number of citations to works is independent of the nature of gender-wise authorship patterns. Research limitations/implications The study examines the status of women in research, specifically in the field of library and information science. The findings of the study are based on the contribution of the authors involved with the journal, “The Electronic Library”. Readers are encouraged to expand the study by including authors that contribute to other library and information science journals. Originality/value The study is first of its kind to highlight the involvement and observe the influence of female authors in the field of library and information science research.

Authors self-citation behaviour in the field of Library and Information Science

2015 ◽  
Vol 67 (4) ◽  
pp. 458-468 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tariq Ahmad Shah ◽  
Sumeer Gul ◽  
Ramesh C Gaur
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Citation Index ◽  
Citation Count ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
Total Citation ◽  
Citation Behavior ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Large Sample ◽  
Number Of Authors

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to analyse the author self-citation behavior in the field of Library and Information Science. Various factors governing the author self-citation behavior have also been studied. Design/methodology/approach – The 2012 edition of Social Science Citation Index was consulted for the selection of LIS journals. Under the subject heading “Information Science and Library Science” there were 84 journals and out of these 12 journals were selected for the study based on systematic sampling. The study was confined to original research and review articles that were published in select journals in the year 2009. The main reason to choose 2009 was to get at least five years (2009-2013) citation data from Web of Science Core Collection (excluding Book Citation Index) and SciELO Citation Index. A citation was treated as self-citation whenever one of the authors of citing and cited paper was common, i.e., the set of co-authors of the citing paper and that of the cited one are not disjoint. To minimize the risk of homonyms, spelling variances and misspelling in authors’ names, the authors compared full author names in citing and cited articles. Findings – A positive correlation between number of authors and total number of citations exists with no correlation between number of authors and number/share of self-citations, i.e., self-citations are not affected by the number of co-authors in a paper. Articles which are produced in collaboration attract more self-citations than articles produced by only one author. There is no statistically significant variation in citations counts (total and self-citations) in works that are result of different types of collaboration. A strong and statistically significant positive correlation exists between total citation count and frequency of self-citations. No relation could be ascertained between total citation count and proportion of self-citations. Authors tend to cite more of their recent works than the work of other authors. Total citation count and number of self-citations are positively correlated with the impact factor of source publication and correlation coefficient for total citations is much higher than that for self-citations. A negative correlation exhibits between impact factor and the share of self-citations. Of particular note is that the correlation in all the cases is of weak nature. Research limitations/implications – The research provides an understanding of the author self-citations in the field of LIS. readers are encouraged to further the study by taking into account large sample, tracing citations also from Book Citation Index (WoS) and comparing results with other allied subjects so as to validate the robustness of the findings of this study. Originality/value – Readers are encouraged to further the study by taking into account large sample, tracing citations also from Book Citation Index (WoS) and comparing results with other allied subjects so as to validate the robustness of the findings of this study.

Journal packing density of library and information science research journals at the global level: a study

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ramesh Pandita ◽  
Shivendra Singh
Keyword(s):  
Packing Density ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
Global Level ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Journal Publishing ◽  
Research Journal ◽  
The Usa

Purpose This study aims to find out the average journal packing density (JPD) of Library and Information Science (LIS) research journals published across the world. The concept, JPD, means the average number of research articles published by a research journal in one volume. Accordingly, the undergoing study evaluates the average number of research articles published in each volume of each research journal published in the field of LIS at the global level. Some other key aspects evaluated include the number of LIS research journal publishing countries, average JPD of LIS research journals at the continental level, etc. Design/methodology/approach This study is purely based on secondary data retrieved from SCImago, which is SCOPUS data. Keeping in view the objectives of this study, the data about research articles published in all LIS research journals during the period 2015 through 2019 were retrieved to undertake the study. Findings From the data analysis, it emerged that 256 research journals duly indexed by SCOPUS are published in the field of LIS across 36 countries. In all 48,596 research articles were published from 2015 to 2019 in these research journals at an average of 44.71 research articles per journal per volume. More than 75% of LIS research journals are published from Germany, Spain, Netherlands, the USA and the UK. Research journals published from the USA have higher JPD of 53.09 research articles per journal per volume, which is 18.74% higher than the average global JPD of LIS research journals. 50% of LIS research journal publishing countries are from Europe and the majority 52.55% LIS research articles were published in European LIS research journals. The average JPD of LIS research journals published from North America is 51.73 research articles per journal per volume, which is the highest across continents. Research limitations/implications Standardization of JPD of research journals irrespective of the subject discipline they are published in is important for many reasons and the foremost being, such standardization helps in keeping at bay the predatory research journals, which normally float such packing density norms, with the sole aim to earn money in the shape of manuscript handling charges, thereby publishing a far greater number of research article in each issue of a journal than the average research articles published by a research journal. Originality/value Very few studies have been conducted around the concept JPD, especially by the authors of this particular study. This study has however been particularized to the LIS subject discipline, while the findings add to existing lot of study already undertaken, hence outcome can be generalized.

What is the impact of library and information science on knowledge management research?

2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Md Anwarul Islam ◽  
Naresh Kumar Agarwal
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Management ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
Authorship Pattern ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Codified Knowledge ◽  
Common Goals ◽  
Access To Knowledge ◽  
Low Coverage ◽  
The Impact

Purpose The purpose of this study is to determine the place of library and information Science (LIS) research within leading knowledge management (KM) journals and conferences. Design/methodology/approach Authors examined articles published from 2000-2018 in top-20 KM publications identified by Google Scholar to look for relationship with LIS. Authors analyzed the identified LIS-related articles to determine the publication trends based on LIS terms used, populations, authorship pattern, country, information setting type and top-cited articles. Findings Authors found that the coverage of LIS-related articles within leading KM publications was very low. From the more than 10,000 KM research articles, less than 1 per cent were LIS-related. Research limitations/implications This study would help LIS researchers measure the space they have created for their field within leading KM research. By showing the relatively low coverage of LIS within KM research, the study demonstrates that LIS researchers/practitioners need to do more for LIS to be recognized as an important area within KM. KM publications can also enable greater synergies with LIS for mutual benefit. Originality/value LIS researchers have increasingly called for KM implementation within libraries. The KM field has a long history in library practice in the context of managing and organizing codified knowledge. Both KM and LIS share the common goals of providing access to knowledge for sharing, transfer and use. However, hardly any studies have looked at the amount of synergy or overlap between these two different but related areas, and whether LIS matters to KM, even though LIS practitioners have been highlighting that KM matters to LIS.

scholarly journals Eye tracking in library and information science: a literature review

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (4) ◽  
pp. 585-614 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haakon Lund
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Eye Tracking ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Reference Databases ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Published Research ◽  
Tracking Technology

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to present a systematic literature review of the application of eye-tracking technology within the field of library and information science. Eye-tracking technology has now reached a level of maturity, which makes the use of the technology more accessible. Subsequently, a growing interest in employing eye tracking as a methodology within library and information science research must be anticipated. Design/methodology/approach The review follows the guidelines set in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses recommendations. Two reference databases are searched for relevant references: Library and Information Science Abstracts and Library, Information Science and Technology Abstracts. The main selection criteria are peer-reviewed literature that describes the experimental setting, including which eye-tracking equipment was used, the number of test persons and reports on the eye-tracking measures. Furthermore, this study will report which other methods were applied in combination with eye tracking. Findings The number of published research utilizing eye-tracking technologies within library and information science (LIS) is still limited although an increase in the use of eye-tracking technologies is observed during recent years. Originality/value To the knowledge of the author, this is the first systematic review on eye-tracking technology and application in LIS.

Observation studies vs therapeutic trials in three journals over three decades of pediatric critical care: a systematic review.

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Scott Baird
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Critical Care ◽  
Impact Factor ◽  
Citation Count ◽  
Impact Factors ◽  
Pediatric Critical Care ◽  
Therapeutic Trials ◽  
Pubmed Search ◽  
Medical Subspecialty ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background: Pediatric critical care developed rapidly as a medical subspecialty over the three decades since 1987, concurrent with a decline in Pediatric ICU mortality rates. It would be interesting to know if research characterized as observation studies or therapeutic trials had a greater impact on this subspecialty during this time. Methods: Three journals with a broad range of impact factors which published pediatric critical care research between 1988 and 2017 were chosen for a systematic review, including a PubMed search for all pediatric critical care studies in these journals during the study period. Studies were characterized as either observation studies or therapeutic trials. Each study’s impact was assessed using citation counts collected from Google Scholar. Results: Therapeutic trials as a percentage of research studies increased with a journal’s impact factor; in addition, therapeutic trials were cited more frequently than observation studies. However, there were more observation studies than therapeutic trials, the citation count increased for both observation studies and therapeutic trials as a journal’s impact factor increased, and the citation count was similar for some or all observation studies and therapeutic trials in two of the study journals. The 10 most cited studies included 7 observation studies and 3 therapeutic trials. Conclusions: This systematic review of three journals suggests that both observation studies and therapeutic trials contributed to the impact of research in pediatric critical care during the three decades following 1987.

Library and information science research in the Arab World: a bibliometric analysis 1951–2021

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadeem Siddique ◽  
Shafiq Ur Rehman ◽  
Shakil Ahmad ◽  
Akhtar Abbas ◽  
Muhammad Ajmal Khan
Keyword(s):  
Information Seeking ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Arab World ◽  
Research Performance ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Data Retrieval ◽  
Arab Countries ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
Arab Region ◽  
Content Type

Purpose This study aims to investigate the research productivity of library and information science (LIS) authors affiliated with the 22 countries of the Arab League. It also identifies the top countries, organizations, authors, journals, natures of collaboration, and frequently used keywords in LIS research in the Arab world. Design/methodology/approach Bibliometric methods were used to evaluate the research performance of the authors affiliated with library organizations in the Arab region. The Elsevier Scopus database was selected for data retrieval. A comprehensive search strategy was adopted to retrieve 863 publications contributed by LIS authors affiliated with the Arab countries. VOS viewer, Biblioshiny, BiblioAnalyitics, Microsoft Access and Microsoft Excel were used for data visualization and analysis. Findings This paper presents the dynamics and the state of the LIS research in the Arab region published between 1951 and 2021. The results of the study have highlighted an upward trend in the growth of the publications, especially in the past four years. The largest number of studies were published in the year 2020. The country-wise analysis ranked Kuwait and Saudi Arabia as the top LIS research producing countries with five and four researchers, respectively. The Kuwait University, the King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals and the Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University were the three most productive organizations. Academic libraries, social media, bibliometrics, information-seeking behavior, information literacy and knowledge management were identified as the major areas of interest for the researchers. Internet and open access were topics that had gained recent popularity, while the digital library, research data management, green librarianship, link data, cloud computing, library leadership, library automation and artificial intelligence were identified as areas requiring further attention. Furthermore, the single-author pattern was found to be the most preferred pattern. Practical implications The findings of this study would help prospective researchers in choosing the neglected areas of research that require further investigation. They would also help policymakers in identifying factors that need more attention and allocation of research funds. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first comprehensive bibliometric study that presents a holistic picture of the LIS research in the Arab region.

Interlending and document supply: a review of the recent literature; 94

2016 ◽  
Vol 44 (4) ◽  
pp. 182-185
Author(s):  
Mike McGrath
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Resource Sharing ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Recent Literature ◽  
Subject Area ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Regular Review

Purpose This paper aims to review the current library and information science (LIS) literature for document supply, resource sharing and other issues such as open access (OA) that have an impact on the service. Design/methodology/approach The approach is based on the scanning of about 150 journals, reports, websites and blogs. Findings OA continues to grow and, hence, the impact of document supply. Improvements in the Interlending and Document Supply service are satisfying. Originality/value This paper is the only regular review of LIS literature in this subject area.

An index-based ranking of conferences in a distinctive manner

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad Farooq ◽  
Hikmat Ullah Khan ◽  
Tassawar Iqbal ◽  
Saqib Iqbal
Keyword(s):  
Information Science ◽  
Research Work ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
Data Set ◽  
H Index ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Research Fields ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Bibliometric Measures ◽  
Better Than

Purpose Bibliometrics is one of the research fields in library and information science that deals with the analysis of academic entities. In this regard, to gauge the productivity and popularity of authors, publication counts and citation counts are common bibliometric measures. Similarly, the significance of a journal is measured using another bibliometric measure, impact factor. However, scarce attention has been paid to find the impact and productivity of conferences using these bibliometric measures. Moreover, the application of the existing techniques rarely finds the impact of conferences in a distinctive manner. The purpose of this paper is to propose and compare the DS-index with existing bibliometric indices, such as h-index, g-index and R-index, to study and rank conferences distinctively based on their significance. Design/methodology/approach The DS-index is applied to the self-developed large DBLP data set having publication data over 50 years covering more than 10,000 conferences. Findings The empirical results of the proposed index are compared with the existing indices using the standard performance evaluation measures. The results confirm that the DS-index performs better than other indices in ranking the conferences in a distinctive manner. Originality/value Scarce attention is paid to rank conferences in distinctive manner using bibliometric measures. In addition, exploiting the DS-index to assign unique ranks to the different conferences makes this research work novel.

The use of librarians as occupational study populations in social science research

2014 ◽  
Vol 63 (1/2) ◽  
pp. 2-14
Author(s):  
Julie Still ◽  
Zara Wilkinson
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
The Body ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
Occupational Groups ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Study Population ◽  
The Subject

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to address the use of librarians as a study population in social science research outside of the field of library and information science. Additionally, it aims to make general claims about how frequently librarians have been studied compared to other occupations, as well as to identify and describe existing research that has used librarians as a study population. Design/methodology/approach – The described study had two parts. Two social science databases were searched using the subject headings “librarians” and eight additional occupations, and the results for all nine occupations were analyzed. The peer-reviewed results for “librarians” were then coded by content. The articles that used librarians as a study population were identified, reviewed and described. Findings – Although librarians, as an occupational group, possess many characteristics that should make them an ideal choice for social science research, they seem to be studied less frequently than other occupations. Research limitations/implications – Other occupational groups, such as mathematicians, were also studied infrequently. Further research might consider, more broadly, why some occupations are studied more frequently than others. Future studies might also compare librarianship to other female-dominated professions, such as nursing and education. Additionally, the subject heading “librarians” was applied to articles that studied non-professional library employees, making it difficult to isolate only articles with a focus on degreed librarians. Originality/value – Few other studies have examined social science research in which librarians are used as the study population. By focusing on how librarians are studied and written about in other fields, this paper will add to the body of literature on the professional image of librarians.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document