Scientometric Analysis of Library and Information Science Journals 2003–2012 Using Web of Science

Jabeen, Munazza; Liu, Yun; Rafiq, Muhammad; Jabeen, Misbah; Tahir, Muhammad Nouman

doi:10.1080/10572317.2015.1113602

Cited by 25 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, India, Taiwan, Iran and China, each produced 1 percent of the whole LIS publications. Likewise, in another study, Jabeen, Yun, Rafiq, Jabeen and Tahir (2015) investigated the research output and scholarly communication of LIS professionals during 2003-2012 by using the WoS database for 40 LIS journals. The results of their study disclosed that a majority of the LIS authors (12,847, 69.9 percent) published their articles as solo authors from 2003 to 2009; however, this tendency gradually declined and the number of collaborative publications increased during 2010-2012.…”

Section: Pmm 211mentioning

confidence: 99%

Scholarly research in Library and Information Science: an analysis based on ISI Web of Science

Ahmad

Sheikh

Rafi

2019

PMM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to present a quantitative analysis of the Library and Information Science (LIS) scholarly literature published worldwide. Design/methodology/approach The ISI Web of Science database was used as a source for extracting the data of published documents during the period 2003–2017. The analysis of the published literature was based on the following indicators: research productivity of each county, annual publications, annual citations, highly cited articles, highly cited LIS journals, most productive institutions in the field of LIS and most prolific authors. The types of documents included in this study were research articles, conference proceeding papers, book reviews and editorials. Findings The findings revealed that the USA had the highest overall output of LIS scholarly publications. The year 2016 was identified as the most productive year for the number of publications, whereas 2017 was identified as the most productive year for the number of citations. “Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of Science versus Scopus and Google Scholar” was the most highly cited article. The Journal of Medical Library Association was the most highly cited journal in LIS. Indiana University from the USA was the most productive LIS research institution. Mike Thelwall, from the UK, is identified as the most prolific author in LIS. Originality/value The study will be of interest for those researchers, who intend to conduct bibliometric research studies in LIS.

show abstract

Section: Pmm 211mentioning

confidence: 99%

Scholarly research in Library and Information Science: an analysis based on ISI Web of Science

Ahmad

Sheikh

Rafi

2019

PMM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For instance, Erfanmanesh, Didegah, and Omidvar (2017) report that almost 70% of 1998-2007 LIS publications were from the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Germany and Australia. Similarly, Jabeen et al (2015) discover that the United States and the United Kingdom produced 52% of all publications in the LIS field during 2003-2012. The dominance of western knowledge in the LIS field is directly related to silencing knowledge from most of the world.…”

Section: Western Bias In Lis Publicationsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…The bias toward western knowledge in the LIS field is clearly discovered by non-western scholars (i.e., Han et al, 2014;Jabeen, Yun, Rafiq, Jabeen, & Tahir, 2015). For instance, Erfanmanesh, Didegah, and Omidvar (2017) report that almost 70% of 1998-2007 LIS publications were from the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Germany and Australia.…”

Section: Western Bias In Lis Publicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Toward epistemic justice: An approach for conceptualizing epistemicide in the information professions

Patin

Sebastian

Yeon

et al. 2020

Proc Assoc Inf Sci Technol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The goal of this exploratory paper is to begin to explicate the concept of epistemicide and articulate its function within the information field. We define epistemicide as the killing, silencing, annihilation, or devaluing of a knowledge system. It is not that we are unaware of the injustices happening within our field, but rather, that we are not in discussion across sub‐fields considering the idea that the collective injustices exist and are problematic on individual and systemic levels. We believe epistemicide happens when several epistemic injustices, such as hermeneutical or testimonial injustices, occur collectively reflecting a structured and systemic oppression of particular ways of knowing. We present epistemicide and epistemic injustice as a concept for understanding and addressing ways knowledge systems are silenced, devalued, or annihilated within library and Information Science (LIS).

show abstract

“…United States-affiliated researchers authored more than one-third of these "library science" articles. One reason for this is most likely due to there being more LIS researchers publishing in the United States than any other country worldwide (Jabeen, Yun, & Rafiq et al, 2015). Another reason is that WOS may have stronger alliances with American journal publishers since it is based in North America.…”

Section: Which Are the Leading Countries And Institutions That Producmentioning

confidence: 99%

“Library and Information Science” Literature in Web of Science: What a Decade Tells Us About Scholarly Collaboration in the Field (2007-2016)

Thompson

Garrison

Santelices-Werchez

et al. 2020

e-Ciencias de la Información

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ensuring access to published research is increasingly important for demonstrating research impact, supporting wide readership, creating interest in collaboration, and making way for funding opportunities. This article provides a bibliometric analysis of publications from 2007-2016 in the Web of Science (WOS) database to update understanding of recent international library science research as a means of discussing research impact and scientific collaboration. The methodology is a descriptive analysis of publications retrieved from the WOS database using keywords “library science” and WOS-generated subject descriptor “Information Science & Library Science.” Analysis focused on descriptive data related to our research questions including representation of countries, languages, and journals. The findings reveal that most publications are published by researchers with institutional affiliations in the United States and in English. Library and information science research continues to be strong in collaboration, but international and interdisciplinary collaborations are still low in this sample. The dataset reflects that co- and multi-authored publications have the highest WOS citation counts, reinforcing the value of scholarly collaboration. This research provides a baseline to chart future growth in Library Science research publications and collaborations.

show abstract

Scientometric Analysis of Library and Information Science Journals 2003–2012 Using Web of Science

Cited by 25 publications

References 39 publications

Scholarly research in Library and Information Science: an analysis based on ISI Web of Science

Scholarly research in Library and Information Science: an analysis based on ISI Web of Science

Toward epistemic justice: An approach for conceptualizing epistemicide in the information professions

“Library and Information Science” Literature in Web of Science: What a Decade Tells Us About Scholarly Collaboration in the Field (2007-2016)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About