Articles vs. proceedings papers: Do they differ in research relevance and impact? A case study in the Library and Information Science field

Abstract

a b s t r a c tIn 2008, the type of document "proceedings paper" (PP) was assigned in the WoS database to journal articles which were initially presented at a conference and later adapted for publication in a journal. Since the use of two different labels ("article" and "proceedings paper") might lead to infer differences in their relevance and/or quality, this paper presents a comparative study of standard journal articles and PP in journals to explore potential differences between them. The study focuses on the Library and Information Science field in the Web of Science database and covers the 1990-2008 period. PP approximately account for 9% of the total number of articles in this field, two-thirds of which are published in monographic issues devoted to conferences, which tend to be concentrated in specific journals. Proceedings papers emerge as an heterogeneous set comprising PP in ordinary issues, similar to standard articles in structure and impact of research; and PP in monographic issues, which seem to be less comprehensive and tend to receive less citations. Faster publication of PP in monographic than in ordinary issues may conceal differences in the review process undergone by either type of paper. The main implications of these results for authors, bibliometricians, journal editors and research evaluators are pointed out.

Mapping the dengue scientific landscape worldwide: a bibliometric and network analysis

“…Not only are they considered more complete, but also correspond to more advanced stages of research compared, for instance, to papers published on meetings proceedings (González-Albo & Bordons 2011). …”

The influence of R&D intensity of countries on the impact of international collaborative research: evidence from Spain

“…A high number of references may result from very comprehensive research papers (McVeigh and Mann 2009;González-Albo and Bordons 2011;Costas et al 2012) and may contribute to the quality of publications as well as, in the long term, attract a higher number of citations (Haslam et al 2008). Concerning the number of authors, research can benefit from the collaboration between authors who may contribute with their different specialisation profiles and skills to the development of the research.…”

Publication rate of presentation abstracts presented at the Canadian Health Libraries Association (CHLA/ABSC) annual meetings from 2004-2009

“…Beyond author-related factors, conferences and annual meetings are seen as places to present preliminary, brief or technical content, and successful projects. This type of presentation may not be designed for formal publication or have followed appropriate research design methodologies that would allow for further publication (Aleixandre-Benavent et al, 2009;González-Albo and Bordons, 2011;Harvey and Wandersee, 2010). Evidence coming from the literature suggests that academic librarians, who have the most to gain from publishing, make up the majority of published authors (Harvey and Wandersee, 2010;Lessick et al, 2016).…”