Evolution of research topics in LIS between 1996 and 2019: an analysis based on latent Dirichlet allocation topic model

Abstract

This study investigated the evolution of library and information science (LIS) by analyzing research topics in LIS journal articles. The analysis is divided into five periods covering the years 1996–2019. Latent Dirichlet allocation modeling was used to identify underlying topics based on 14,035 documents. An improved data-selection method was devised in order to generate a dynamic journal list that included influential journals for each period. Results indicate that (a) library science has become less prevalent over time, as there are no top topic clusters relevant to library issues since the period 2000–2005; (b) bibliometrics, especially citation analysis, is highly stable across periods, as reflected by the stable subclusters and consistent keywords; and (c) information retrieval has consistently been the dominant domain with interests gradually shifting to model-based text processing. Information seeking and behavior is also a stable field that tends to be dispersed among various topics rather than presented as its own subject. Information systems and organizational activities have been continuously discussed and have developed a closer relationship with e-commerce. Topics that occurred only once have undergone a change of technological context from the networks and Internet to social media and mobile applications.

A qualitative and quantitative analysis of open citations to retracted articles: the Wakefield 1998 et al.'s case

“…We decided to address this problem by using a topic modeling technique, which is an appropriate method to use for the automatic analysis of texts that works without having preliminary knowledge on the subjects the texts are about. For instance, a recent application of topic modelling for similar purposes is described in the work by Han (2020), who used it to investigate the evolution of research topics in the library and information science (LIS) domain.…”

Productivity and interdisciplinary impacts of Organized Research Units

“…In quantitative science studies, topic models are often used diachronically, to examine the ways research foci have changed over time (Han, 2020;Malaterre, Lareau et al 2020;Rehs, the documents in the corpus that are most relevant or related to a given document (or search query). Boyack, Newman et al (2011) compare several different clustering methods based on different similarity scores, in this sense, including one derived from topic modeling.…”

Institucionalização da Biblioteconomia Progressista e Crítica

“…Sobre o uso dos termos, a pesquisa de Tanus e Silva (2019) buscou em duas bases de dados, uma nacional e outra internacional, artigos que utilizassem os seguintes descritores: "Biblioteconomia Crítica"; "Biblioteconomia Progressista" e "Biblioteconomia Social"na Base Ademais, as pesquisas que focalizam a "Epistemologia da Biblioteconomia" são escassas, sendo mais comuns as de ordem aplicada, empírica, como apontado nos estudos bibliométricos que mapeiam os temas, as pesquisas e as produções da área (DELGADO LÓPEZ-CÓZAR, 2002). Um estudo bibliométrico mais recente acerca das temáticas de pesquisas da Library and Information Science apontou que as pesquisas sobre a Biblioteconomia se tornaram menos prevalentes ao longo do tempo, visto que não há grupos de tópicos principais relevantes para questões da biblioteca, enquanto outros temas se mantiveram estáveis (HAN, 2020). Decerto, acreditamos que os estudos históricos e epistemológicos de qualquer campo científico são fundamentais para seu reconhecimento e fortalecimento; assim, esta sistematização dos acontecimentos da Biblioteconomia Progressista e Crítica apresenta novos caminhos que vêm sendo trilhados por essa Biblioteconomia Contemporânea.…”