LIS research across 50 years: content analysis of journal articles

Abstract

PurposeThis paper analyses the research in Library and Information Science (LIS) and reports on (1) the status of LIS research in 2015 and (2) on the evolution of LIS research longitudinally from 1965 to 2015.Design/methodology/approachThe study employs a quantitative intellectual content analysis of articles published in 30+ scholarly LIS journals, following the design by Tuomaala et al. (2014). In the content analysis, we classify articles along eight dimensions covering topical content and methodology.FindingsThe topical findings indicate that the earlier strong LIS emphasis on L&I services has declined notably, while scientific and professional communication has become the most popular topic. Information storage and retrieval has given up its earlier strong position towards the end of the years analyzed. Individuals are increasingly the units of observation. End-user's and developer's viewpoints have strengthened at the cost of intermediaries' viewpoint. LIS research is methodologically increasingly scattered since survey, scientometric methods, experiment, case studies and qualitative studies have all gained in popularity. Consequently, LIS may have become more versatile in the analysis of its research objects during the years analyzed.Originality/valueAmong quantitative intellectual content analyses of LIS research, the study is unique in its scope: length of analysis period (50 years), width (8 dimensions covering topical content and methodology) and depth (the annual batch of 30+ scholarly journals).

Largest contribution to LIS by external disciplines as measured by the characteristics of research articles

“…Dataset construction and analysis process (Fig. 1) for this study is consistent with the approach used in Vakkari (2021), andtheir other past studies (e.g., 1990;1993), which discuss thoroughly the issues in constructing a dataset for content analysis of the LIS research area. Since we reuse their latest dataset for 2015, see Phase One in Fig.…”

“…Fortunately, the content analysis of LIS by Järvelin and Vakkari (2021) made available a dataset on research topics and methodology. This dataset can be extended in the present study by a discipline analysis of authors' affiliations (see Fig.…”

“…1). In Järvelin and Vakkari (2021), the content analysis consists of eight content dimensions among which six were utilized here: LIS topic and Viewpoint to dissemination process represent the topical content, scholarliness indicates research articles, and research strategy, data-collection method, and type of investigation the methodological aspect of a study (Järvelin & Vakkari, 2021). These dimensions represent essential characteristics of research design and are discussed below and defined in Appendix 2.…”

“…Past literature has analysed research topics, viewpoints, and methods in LIS (e.g., Åström, 2007;Tuomaala et al, 2014;Järvelin & Vakkari, 2021). However, they give no indication on where the contributions come from-from what kind of disciplinary background as mediated by the authors.…”

“…In the present paper, we aim to find out the differences in the characteristics of topical and methodological contributions made by scholars in LIS, external to LIS, and those by LIS and non-LIS scholars in collaboration. For this we reuse the data set by Järvelin and Vakkari (2021) providing a content analysis of LIS articles published in 2015. This dataset describes topical and methodological aspects of more than 1500 articles.…”