Disciplinary, national, and departmental contributions to the literature of library and information science, 2007–2012
William H. Walters
Mary Alice & Tom O'Malley Library, Manhattan College, 4513 Manhattan College Parkway, Riverdale, NY, 10471
Search for more papers by this authorEsther Isabelle Wilder
Department of Sociology, Lehman College, The City University of New York, 250 Bedford Park Boulevard West, Bronx, NY, 10468
Search for more papers by this authorWilliam H. Walters
Mary Alice & Tom O'Malley Library, Manhattan College, 4513 Manhattan College Parkway, Riverdale, NY, 10471
Search for more papers by this authorEsther Isabelle Wilder
Department of Sociology, Lehman College, The City University of New York, 250 Bedford Park Boulevard West, Bronx, NY, 10468
Search for more papers by this authorAbstract
We investigate the contributions of particular disciplines, countries, and academic departments to the literature of library and information science (LIS) using data for the articles published in 31 journals from 2007 to 2012. In particular, we examine the contributions of authors outside the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada; faculty in departments other than LIS; and practicing librarians. Worldwide, faculty in LIS departments account for 31% of the journal literature; librarians, 23%; computer science faculty, 10%; and management faculty, 10%. The top contributing nations are the United States, the United Kingdom, Spain, China, Canada, and Taiwan. Within the United States and the United Kingdom, the current productivity of LIS departments is correlated with past productivity and with other measures of reputation and performance. More generally, the distribution of contributions is highly skewed. In the United States, five departments account for 27% of the articles contributed by LIS faculty; in the United Kingdom, four departments account for nearly two-thirds of the articles. This skewed distribution reinforces the possibility that high-status departments may gain a permanent advantage in the competition for students, faculty, journal space, and research funding. At the same time, concentrations of research-active faculty in particular departments may generate beneficial spillover effects.
References
- Abramo, G., D'Angelo, C.A., & Cicero, T. (2012). What is the appropriate length of the publication period over which to assess research performance? Scientometrics, 93(3), 1005–1017.
- Abrizah, A., Zainab, A.N., Kiran, K., & Raj, R.G. (2013). LIS journals scientific impact and subject categorization: A comparison between Web of Science and Scopus. Scientometrics, 94(2), 721–740.
- Adkins, D., & Budd, J.M. (2006). Scholarly productivity of U.S. LIS faculty. Library & Information Science Research, 28(3), 374–389.
- Adkins, D., & Budd, J.M. (2007). Corrigendum to “Scholarly productivity of U.S. LIS faculty.” Library & Information Science Research, 29(1), 154–158.
- Aharony, N. (2012). Library and information science research areas: A content analysis of articles from the top 10 journals, 2007–8. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 44(1), 27–35.
- Australian Research Council (2014). Excellence for research in Australia (ERA). Retrieved from http://www.arc.gov.au/era/
- Bair, J.H., & Barrons, J.C. (1997). The academic elite in library science: Linkages among top-ranked graduate programs. College & Research Libraries, 58(3), 233–235.
- Bates, M.J. (1998). The role of publication type in the evaluation of LIS programs. Library & Information Science Research, 20(2), 187–198.
- Bolger, D.F., & Smith, E.T. (2006). Faculty status and rank at liberal arts colleges: An investigation into the correlation among faculty status, professional rights and responsibilities, and overall institutional quality. College & Research Libraries, 67(3), 217–229.
- Borgman, C.L., & Rice, R.E. (1992). The convergence of information science and communication: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 43(6), 397–411.
- Boyce, B.R., & Cho, Y. (1988). Tracking school of library and information science faculty productivity. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 29(1), 63–65.
- Boyce, B.R., & Hendren, C. (1996). Authorship as a measure of the productivity of schools of library and information science. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 37(3), 250–271.
- Brace, W. (1992). Quality assessment of library and information science school faculties. Education for Information, 10(2), 115–123.
- Budd, J.M. (2000). Scholarly productivity of U.S. LIS faculty: An update. Library Quarterly, 70(2), 230–245.
- Budd, J.M., & Seavey, C.A. (1996). Productivity of U.S. library and information science faculty: The Hayes study revisited. Library Quarterly, 66(1), 1–20.
- Bushouse, B.K., Jacobson, W.S., Lambright, K.T., Llorens, J.J., Morse, R.S., & Poocharoen, O. (2011). Crossing the divide: Building bridges between public administration practitioners and scholars. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21(Suppl. 1), 99–112.
- Candler, G.G. (2006). The comparative evolution of public administration in Australia, Brazil and Canada. Canadian Public Administration, 49(3), 334–349.
- Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (2014). Standard listings. Retrieved from http://classifications.carnegiefoundation.org/lookup_listings/standard.php
- Chua, A.Y.K., & Yang, C.C. (2008). The shift toward multi-disciplinarity in information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(13), 2156–2170.
- Cronin, B. (2001). Hyperauthorship: A postmodern perversion or evidence of a structural shift in scholarly communication practices? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 52(7), 558–569.
- Cronin, B. (2011). Don't confuse accreditation with reputation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(12), 2299–2300.
- Cronin, B., & Meho, L.I. (2008). The shifting balance of intellectual trade in information studies. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(4), 551–564.
- Cronin, B., & Overfelt, K. (1994). Citation-based auditing of academic performance. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 45(2), 61–72.
- Cronin, B., & Overfelt, K. (1996). Postscript on program rankings. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 47(2), 173–176.
- Davarpanah, M.R., & Aslekia, S. (2008). A scientometric analysis of international LIS journals: Productivity and characteristics. Scientometrics, 77(1), 21–39.
- Erfanmanesh, M.A., Didegah, F., & Omidvar, S. (2010). Research productivity and impact of library and information science in the Web of Science. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science, 15(3), 85–95.
- Finlay, S.C., Sugimoto, C.R., Li, D., & Russell, T.G. (2012). LIS dissertation titles and abstracts (1930–2009): Where have all the librar* gone? Library Quarterly, 82(1), 29–46.
- Finlay, S.C., Ni, C., Tsou, A., & Sugimoto, C.R. (2013). Publish or practice? An examination of librarians' contributions to research. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 13(4), 403–421.
- Frandsen, T.F., & Nicolaisen, J. (2010). What is in a name? Credit assignment practices in different disciplines. Journal of Informetrics, 4(4), 608–617.
- Hagen, N.T. (2010). Harmonic publication and citation counting: Sharing authorship credit equitably—not equally, geometrically or arithmetically. Scientometrics, 84(3), 785–793.
- Hagen, N.T. (2013). Harmonic coauthor credit: A parsimonious quantification of the byline hierarchy. Journal of Informetrics, 7(4), 784–791.
- Hagen, N.T. (2014). Counting and comparing publication output with and without equalizing and inflationary bias. Journal of Informetrics, 8(2), 310–317.
- Harzing, A.-W. (2013). Document categories in the ISI Web of Knowledge: Misunderstanding the social sciences? Scientometrics, 94(1), 23–34.
- Hayes, R.M. (1983). Citation statistics as a measure of faculty research productivity. Journal of Education for Librarianship, 23(3), 151–172.
- Higher Education Funding Council for England, Scottish Funding Council, Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, & Department for Employment and Learning, Northern Ireland (2009). RAE 2008 quality profiles: UOA 37 Library and information management. Retrieved from http://www.rae.ac.uk/results/qualityProfile.aspx?id=37&type=uoa
- iSchools Organization (2014). Apply to join. Retrieved from http://ischools.org/members/apply-to-join/
- International Monetary Fund. (2014). World economic outlook database, October 2013: Gross domestic product based on purchasing-power-parity (PPP) per capita GDP. 2013 data. Retrieved from http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2013/02/weodata/index.aspx
- Joswick, K.E. (1999). Article publication patterns of academic librarians: An Illinois case study. College & Research Libraries, 60(4), 340–349.
- Larivière, V., Sugimoto, C.R., & Cronin, B. (2012). A bibliometric chronicling of library and information science's first hundred years. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(5), 997–1016.
- Larsen, P.O. (2008). The state of the art in publication counting. Scientometrics, 77(2), 235–251.
- Lewis, C. (2014). Academic librarian status. Retrieved from http://academic-librarian-status.wikispaces.com/
- Lopatovska, I., & Ransom, E. (2014). The state of L-schools: Intellectual diversity and faculty composition. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science. doi: 10.1177/0961000614533718.
10.1177/0961000614533718 Google Scholar
- Manzari, L. (2013). Library and information science journal prestige as assessed by library and information science faculty. Library Quarterly, 83(1), 42–60.
- Marchionini, G., Solomon, P., Davis, C., & Russell, T. (2006). Information and library science MPACT: A preliminary analysis. Library & Information Science Research, 28(4), 480–500.
- Marshall, A. (1890). Principles of economics (Vol. 1). London: Macmillan. Retrieved from https://archive.org/details/principlesecono00marsgoog
- Meho, L.I., & Spurgin, K.M. (2005). Ranking the research productivity of library and information science faculty and schools: An evaluation of data sources and research methods. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 56(12), 1314–1331.
- Milojević, S., Sugimoto, C.R., Yan, E., & Ding, Y. (2011). The cognitive structure of library and information science: Analysis of article title words. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(10), 1933–1953.
- Mulvaney, J.P. (1992). The characteristics associated with perceived quality in schools of library and information science. Library Quarterly, 62(1), 1–27.
- Mulvaney, J.P. (1993). The characteristics associated with perceived quality in schools of library and information science: An update and prediction. Library Quarterly, 63(2), 189–191.
- National Research Council. (1982). An assessment of research-doctorate programs in the United States. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
- National Research Council. (1995). Research-doctorate programs in the United States: Continuity and change. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
- National Research Council. (2011). A data-based assessment of research-doctorate programs in the United States. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
- Ni, C., Sugimoto, C.R., & Cronin, B. (2013). Visualizing and comparing four facets of scholarly communication: Producers, artifacts, concepts, and gatekeepers. Scientometrics, 94(3), 1161–1173.
- Ni, C., Sugimoto, C.R., & Jiang, J. (2013). Venue-author coupling: A measure for identifying disciplines through author communities. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(2), 265–279.
- Nisonger, T.E., & Davis, C.H. (2005). The perception of library and information science journals by LIS education deans and ARL library directors: A replication of the Kohl-Davis study. College & Research Libraries, 66(4), 341–377.
- Nixon, J.M. (2014). Core journals in library and information science: Developing a methodology for ranking LIS journals. College & Research Libraries, 75(1), 66–90.
- Odell, J., & Gabbard, R. (2008). The interdisciplinary influence of library and information science 1996–2004: A journal-to-journal citation analysis. College & Research Libraries, 69(6), 546–564.
- Park, T.K. (2008). Asian and Pacific region authorship characteristics in leading library and information science journals. Serials Review, 34(4), 243–251.
- Pettigrew, K.E., & Nicholls, P.T. (1994). Publication patterns of LIS faculty from 1982–1992: Effects of doctoral programs. Library & Information Science Research, 16(2), 139–156.
- Põder, E. (2010). Let's correct that small mistake. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(12), 2593–2594.
- Prebor, G. (2010). Analysis of the interdisciplinary nature of library and information science. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 42(4), 256–267.
- Price, D.J. (1981). Multiple authorship. Science, 212(4498), 986.
- Salton, G. (1973). On the development of information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 24(3), 218–220.
- Sanderson, M. (2008). Revisiting h measured on U.K. LIS and IR academics. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(7), 1184–1190.
- Saracevic, T. (1971). Five years, five volumes and 2345 pages of the Annual Review of Information Science and Technology. Information Storage and Retrieval, 7(3), 127–139.
- Schlögl, C., & Petschnig, W. (2005). Library and information science journals: An editor survey. Library Collections, Acquisitions, & Technical Services, 29(1), 4–32.
- Schlögl, C., & Stock, W.G. (2008). Practitioners and academics as authors and readers: The case of LIS journals. Journal of Documentation, 64(5), 643–666.
- Seng, L.B., & Willett, P. (1995). The citedness of publications by United Kingdom library schools. Journal of Information Science, 21(1), 68–71.
- Shaw, D., & Vaughan, L. (2008). Publication and citation patterns among LIS faculty: Profiling a “typical professor.” Library & Information Science Research, 30(1), 47–55.
- Stewart, C. (2010). Whither metrics? Tools for assessing publication impact of academic library practitioners. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 36(5), 449–453.
- Stewart, C. (2011). Whither metrics, part II. Tools for assessing publication impact of academic library practitioners. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 37(5), 445–448.
- Su, Y.-C., Yu, C., Lin, M.-W., & Hung, L.-C. (2013). An assessment of recent authors and authorship patterns in Taiwan's public administration research. International Journal of Public Administration, 36(2), 84–97.
10.1080/01900692.2012.721282 Google Scholar
- Sugimoto, C.R. (2011). Looking across communicative genres: A call for inclusive indicators of interdisciplinarity. Scientometrics, 86(2), 449–461.
- Sugimoto, C.R., Pratt, J.A., & Hauser, K. (2008). Using field cocitation analysis to assess reciprocal and shared impact of LIS/MIS fields. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(9), 1441–1453.
- Thomas, O., & Willett, P. (2000). Webometric analysis of departments of librarianship and information science. Journal of Information Science, 26(6), 421–428.
- Thomson Reuters (2012a). Web of Science help: Guidelines for searching names. Retrieved from http://images.webofknowledge.com/WOKRS57B4/help/WOS/hs_author_names.html
- Thomson Reuters. (2012b). Journal citation reports: 2011 social science edition. New York: Thomson Reuters.
- Tuomaala, O., Järvelin, K., & Vakkari, P. (2014). Evolution of library and information science, 1965–2005: Content analysis of journal articles. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(7), 1446–1462.
- U.S. News & World Report. (2014). Library and information studies ranked in 2013. Retrieved from http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-library-information-science-programs/library-information-science-rankings
- Varlejs, J., & Dalrymple, P. (1986). Publication output of library and information science faculty. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 27(2), 71–89.
- Vaughan, L., & Shaw, D. (2008). A new look at evidence of scholarly citation in citation indexes and from web sources. Scientometrics, 74(2), 317–330.
- Wallace, D.P. (1990). The most productive faculty. Library Journal, 115(8), 61–63.
- Watson, P.D. (1985). Production of scholarly articles by academic librarians and library school faculty. College & Research Libraries, 46(4), 334–342.
- Weller, A.C., Hurd, J.M., & Wiberley, S.E. (1999). Publication patterns of U.S. academic librarians from 1993 to 1997. College & Research Libraries, 60(4), 352–362.
- White, H.D., & McCain, K.W. (1998). Visualizing a discipline: An author co-citation analysis of information science, 1972–1995. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(4), 327–355.
- White, H.S. (1981). Perceptions by educators and administrators of the ranking of library school programs. College & Research Libraries, 42(3), 191–202.
- Wiberley, S.E., Hurd, J.M., & Weller, A.C. (2006). Publication patterns of U.S. academic librarians from 1998 to 2002. College & Research Libraries, 67(3), 205–215.
- Wiggins, A., & Sawyer, S. (2012). Intellectual diversity and the faculty composition of iSchools. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(1), 8–21.