“Library and Information Science” Literature in Web of Science: What a Decade Tells Us About Scholarly Collaboration in the Field (2007-2016) Literatura sobre “Bibliotecología y Ciencias de la Información” en Web of Science: Qué nos dice una década sobre la colaboración académica en el campo (2007-2016)

dc.creatorThompson, Kim M.
dc.creatorGarrison, Kasey
dc.creatorSantelices-Werchez, Carolina
dc.creatorArellano-Rojas, Paulina
dc.creatorReyes-Lillo, Danilo
dc.date2020-06-09
dc.date.accessioned2022-06-23T17:21:54Z
dc.date.available2022-06-23T17:21:54Z
dc.descriptionEnsuring 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.en-US
dc.descriptionAsegurar el acceso a la investigación publicada es cada vez más importante para demostrar el impacto de la investigación, apoyar un amplio número de lectores, crear interés en la colaboración y dar paso a oportunidades de financiamiento. Este artículo proporciona un análisis bibliométrico de las publicaciones 2007-2016 en la base de datos de Web of Science (WOS) para actualizar la comprensión de la internacionalización reciente de la investigación en el campo de la bibliotecología como medio para discutir el impacto de la investigación y la colaboración científica. La metodología es un análisis descriptivo de las publicaciones recuperadas de la base de datos de WOS, utilizando las palabras clave "Bibliotecología" y el encabezado de materia "Ciencia de la información y biblitecología" generado por WOS. El análisis se centró en datos descriptivos relacionados con las preguntas de investigación, incluida la representación de países, idiomas y revistas, así como patrones de autoría con colaboraciones internacionales, nacionales, intrainstitucionales e interdisciplinarias y recuentos de citas. Los hallazgos revelan que la mayoría de los artículos son publicados en inglés, por investigadores con afiliaciones institucionales en los Estados Unidos. Las investigaciones sobre Bibliotecología y Ciencias de la Información continúan siendo sólidas en colaboración, pero las colaboraciones internacionales e interdisciplinarias aún son bajas en esta muestra. El conjunto de datos refleja que las publicaciones de coautoría y de múltiples autores tienen el mayor número de citas de WOS, lo que refuerza el valor de la colaboración académica. Esta investigación proporciona una base para registrar el futuro crecimiento de las publicaciones y colaboraciones de investigación en Bibliotecología.es-ES
dc.formatapplication/pdf
dc.formatapplication/epub+zip
dc.identifierhttps://revistas.ucr.ac.cr/index.php/eciencias/article/view/39176
dc.identifier10.15517/eci.v10i2.39176
dc.identifier.urihttps://demo7.dspace.org/handle/10673/1294
dc.languagespa
dc.publisherUniversidad de Costa Ricaes-ES
dc.relationhttps://revistas.ucr.ac.cr/index.php/eciencias/article/view/39176/42764
dc.relationhttps://revistas.ucr.ac.cr/index.php/eciencias/article/view/39176/43118
dc.relation/*ref*/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. doi: 10.1177/0961000611424819
dc.relation/*ref*/Åström, F. (2007). Changes in the LIS research front: Time‐sliced co-citation analyses of LIS journal articles, 1990–2004. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 58(7), 947-957. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20567
dc.relation/*ref*/Barik N., & Jena, P. (2015). Trends in library and information science doctoral research at Utkal University Bhubaneswar: A bibliometric overview. International Journal of Library & Information Science, 1(1), 31-36. Retrieved from http://eprints.rclis.org/31115/1/Trends%20in%20Library%20And%20Information%20Science%20Doctoral%20Research%20at%20Utkal%20University%2C%20Bhubaneswar%20%20A%20Bibliometric%20Overview.pdf
dc.relation/*ref*/Beaver, D.D. (2004). Does collaborative research have greater epistemic authority? Scientometrics, 60(3), 399-408. Doi: 10.1023/B:SCIE.0000034382.85360.cd
dc.relation/*ref*/Becher, T., & Trowler, P. (2001). Academic tribes and territories: intellectual enquiry and the culture of disciplines. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
dc.relation/*ref*/Bradford, S. (1934). Sources of information on specific subjects. Engineering, 37(3550), 85-86. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/016555158501000406
dc.relation/*ref*/Cahill, T., & Bazzacco, M. (2015). There is no easy way to measure the impact of university research on society. The Conversation. Retrieved from https://theconversation.com/there-is-no-easy-way-to-measure-the-impact-of-university-research-on-society-50856
dc.relation/*ref*/Callaway, E. (2016). Beat it, impact factor! publishing elite turns against controversial metric. Nature, 535(7611), 210-211. doi: 10.1038/nature.2016.20224
dc.relation/*ref*/Chang, Y., & Huang, M. (2011). A study of the evolution of interdisciplinarity in library and information science: Using three bibliometric method. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(1), 22-33. doi: 10.1002/asi.21649
dc.relation/*ref*/Chang, Y., Huang, M., & Lin, C. (2015). Evolution of research subjects in library and information science based on keyword, bibliographical coupling, and co-citation analyses. Scientometrics, 105(3), 2071-2087. doi: 10.1007/s11192-015-1762-8
dc.relation/*ref*/Chu, H. (2015). Research methods in library and information science: A content analysis. Library & Information Science Research, 37(1), 36-41. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2014.09.003
dc.relation/*ref*/Collyer, F.M. (2018). Global patterns in the publishing of academic knowledge: Global north, global south. Current Sociology, 66(1), 56-73. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392116680020
dc.relation/*ref*/Da Silva, C.G. (2013). Perspectivas de investigação em ciência da informação. InVI encontro ibérico EDICIC. Retrieved from http://eprints.rclis.org/22854/1/PORTUGAL_Perspectivas%20de%20investiga%C3%A7%C3%A3o%20em%20Ci%C3%AAncia%20da%20Informa%C3%A7%C3%A3o.pdf
dc.relation/*ref*/Ding, Y., Rousseau, R., & Wolfram, D. (2014). Measuring scholarly impact: Methods and practice. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
dc.relation/*ref*/Dos Santos, A., & Rodrigues, M. (2014). Information science: Theoretical-disciplinary delimitation and interdisciplinary interactions with library science. Transinformacao, 26(1), 91-100. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0103-37862014000100009
dc.relation/*ref*/Ebrahim, A. (2013). Let’s be realistic about measuring impact. Harvard Business Review. Recuperado de: https://hbr.org/2013/03/lets-be-realistic-about-measur.html
dc.relation/*ref*/Echavarría, A. L. M., Torres, A. J. Q., Paz, A. J. O., Soto, L. M. H., Higuera, C. R., Mesa, H. C., . . . Puerto, Y. M. P. (2015). Tendencias investigativas de la ciencia de la información y la bibliotecología en Iberoamérica y el Caribe. BiD: textos, universitaris de biblioteconomia I documentació, 35. Retrieved from http://bid.ub.edu/es/35/menendez.htm
dc.relation/*ref*/Endersby, J.W. (1996). Collaborative research in the social sciences: Multiple authorship and publication credit. Social Science Quarterly, 77(2), 375-392. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/42863473
dc.relation/*ref*/Ferreira, C., & Neves, B. (2014). Caracterização da produção científica Portuguesa em ciência da informação disponibilizada em acesso aberto no e-LiS. Cadernos BAD, (2), 95-98. Retrieved from https://www.bad.pt/publicacoes/index.php/cadernos/article/view/1184/1191
dc.relation/*ref*/Garg, K.C., & Sharma, C. (2017). Bibliometrics of library and information science research in India during 2004-2015. DESIDOC Journal of Library and Information Technology, 37(3), 221-227. Doi: https://doi.org/10.14429/djlit.37.3.11188
dc.relation/*ref*/Gauchi Risso, V. (2016). Sobre la naturaleza de la investigación en bibliotecología y ciencia de la información durante el período 1970-2000. Revista Cubana de Información en Ciencias de la Salud, 27(1), 100-117. Retrieved from http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2307-21132016000100008
dc.relation/*ref*/Godin, B., & Gingras, Y. (2000). Impact of collaborative research on academic science. Science and Public Policy, 27(1), 65-73. doi: https://doi.org/10.3152/147154300781782147
dc.relation/*ref*/Gooch, J. C. (2005). The Dynamics and Challenges of Interdisciplinary Collaboration: A Case Study of “Cortical Depth of Bench” in Group Proposal Writing. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 48(1), 177-190. Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=1391667
dc.relation/*ref*/Gornstein, L., & Peritz, B.C. (2013). Information and library science, changes that influenced its new character, direction and research: A bibliometric study, 1985- 2006. In Proceedings of ISSI 2013 - 14th International Society of Scientometrics and Informetrics Conference, 1, 1019-1029. http://www.issi2013.org/Images/ISSI_Proceedings_Volume_I.pdf.
dc.relation/*ref*/Han, P., Shi, J., Li, X., et al. (2014). International collaboration in LIS: Global trends and networks at the country and institution level. Scientometrics, 98, 53-72. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1146-x
dc.relation/*ref*/Hasan, N., & Singh, M. (2015). Library and information science research output: A study based on Web of Science. Collnet Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management, 9(1), 47-64. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/09737766.2015.1027089
dc.relation/*ref*/Hernández-González, V., Sans-Rosell, N., Jové-Deltell, M., & Reverter-Masia, J. (2016). Comparación entre Web of Science y Scopus, Estudio Bibliométrico de las Revistas de Anatomía y Morfología. International Journal of Morphology, 34(4), 1369-1377. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0717-95022016000400032
dc.relation/*ref*/Horri, A. (2004). Bibliometric Overview of Library and Information Science Research Productivity in Iran. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 45(1), 15-25. doi:10.2307/40323918
dc.relation/*ref*/Hunter, L., & Leahey, E. (2008). Collaborative research in sociology: Trends and contributing factors. The American Sociologist, 39(4), 290-306. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12108-008-9042-1
dc.relation/*ref*/Ivanović, D., & Ho, Y. (2016). Highly cited articles in the information science and library science category in social science citation index: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 48(1), 36-46. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0961000614537514
dc.relation/*ref*/Jabeen, M., Yun, L., Rafiq, M., et al. (2015). Scientometric analysis of LIS journals 2003-2012 using Web of Science. International Information & Library Review, 47(3-4), 72-82. doi: 10.1080/10572317.2015.1113602
dc.relation/*ref*/Jeffery, R. (2013). Authorship in multi-disciplinary, multi-national north-south research projects: Issues of equity, capacity and accountability. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 4(2), 208-229. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2013.829300
dc.relation/*ref*/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. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22645
dc.relation/*ref*/Levitt, J.M., & Thelwall, M. (2016). Long term productivity and collaboration in information science. Scientometrics, 108, 1103-1117. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2061-8
dc.relation/*ref*/Liberatore, G., & Herrero-Solana, V. (2013). Thematic characterization of research on information science in brazil from 2000-2009. TransInformação, 25(3), 225-235. Retrieved from http://www.scielo.br/pdf/tinf/v25n3/05.pdf
dc.relation/*ref*/Lijina, P. (2018). A Bibliometric Study of International Journal of Library and Information Science. International Journal of Library and Information Studies, 8(1), 189-195. Retrieved from http://www.ijlis.org/img/2018_Vol_8_Issue_1/189-195.pdf
dc.relation/*ref*/Lotka, A.J. (1929). The frequency distribution of scientific productivity. Journal of Washington Academy Sciences, 16(12), 317-323. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/24529203
dc.relation/*ref*/Maz-Machado, A., Jiménez-Fanjul, N., & Madrid, M.J. (2015). Collaboration in the Iberoamerican journals in the category information science & library science in WOS. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal). Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/1270/
dc.relation/*ref*/Mittal, R. (2011). Library and information science research trends in India. Annals of Library and Information Studies, 58(4), 319-325. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/df33/95e31bf0acfbf82d0ca2488c51efdcf2fe05.pdf
dc.relation/*ref*/Moulier-Boutang, Y. (2012). Cognitive capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.
dc.relation/*ref*/Nagarkar, S.P., & Kumbhar, R. (2015). Text mining: An analysis of research published under the subject category ‘information science library science’ in Web of Science database during 1999-2013. Library Review, 64(3), 248-262. doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/LR-08-2014-0091
dc.relation/*ref*/Olmeda-Gomez, C., Ovalle-Perandones, M., & Perianes-Rodriguez, A. (2017). Co-word analysis and thematic landscapes in Spanish information science literature, 1985– 2014. Scientometrics, 113(1), 195-217. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2486-8
dc.relation/*ref*/Parada, A.E. (2015a). Hacia un inventario provisional de las tendencias en bibliotecología y ciencia de la información. Información, Cultura y Sociedad, (33), 75-88. doi: https://doi.org/10.34096/ics.i33.1890
dc.relation/*ref*/Parada, A.E. (2015b). Más allá de la ‘ciencia de la información’: Tendencias de una disciplina en movimiento perpetuo. Información, Cultura y Sociedad, (32), 79-98. doi: https://doi.org/10.34096/ics.i32.1337
dc.relation/*ref*/Penfield, T., Baker, M.J., Scoble, R., et al. (2013). Assessment, evaluations, and definitions of research impact: A review. Research Evaluation, 23(1), 21-32. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvt021
dc.relation/*ref*/Phillipson, R. (1993). Linguistic imperialism: African perspectives. ELT Journal, 50(2), 160-167. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/50.2.160
dc.relation/*ref*/Ramirez Ibarra, I. (2016). Tres perspectivas globales en bibliotecología y ciencia de la información. Información, Cultura y Sociedad, (34), 79-92. doi: https://doi.org/10.34096/ics.i34.2251
dc.relation/*ref*/Shin, J.C., Lee, S.J., & Kim, Y. (2013). Research collaboration across higher education systems: Maturity, language use, and regional differences. Studies in Higher Education, 38(3), 425-440. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2013.774585
dc.relation/*ref*/Sinha, P. (2010). Web of knowledge: User tips. Retrieved from http://interest.science.thomsonreuters.com/content/WOKUserTips-201010-IN
dc.relation/*ref*/Slaughter, S., & Rhoades, G. (2010). Academic capitalism and the new economy: Markets, state and higher education. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234593995_Academic_Capitalism_and_the_New_Economy_Markets_State_and_Higher_Education
dc.relation/*ref*/Subramanyam, K. (1983). Bibliometric studies of research collaboration: A review. Journal of Information Science, 6, 33-38. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/016555158300600105
dc.relation/*ref*/Sugiuchi, M., Habu, E., Ueda, S., et al. (2011). The trend of library and information science research in Japan: A content analysis of research articles. Library and Information Science, (66), 127-151. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/287500110_The_Trend_of_Library_and_Information_Science_Research_in_Japan_A_Content_Analysis_of_Research_Articles
dc.relation/*ref*/Todeschini, R., & Baccini, A. (2016). Handbook of bibliometric indicators: Quantitative tools for studying and evaluating research. Weinheim, Germany: Wiley-VCH.
dc.relation/*ref*/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. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23034
dc.relation/*ref*/Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Educación, la Ciencia y la Cultura. (2017). International scientific collaboration has become a must, says report. UNESCO Science, Technology and Innovation Policy. Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/new/en/natural-sciences/science-technology/single-view-sc-policy/news/international_scientific_collaboration_has_become_a_must_sa/
dc.relation/*ref*/Prieto-Gutierrez, J. & Segado-Boj, F. (2019). Annals of Library and Information Studies: A Bibliometric Analysis of the Journal and a Comparison with the Top Library and Information Studies Journals in Asia and Worldwide (2011–2017). The Serials Librarian, 77(1-2), 1-11. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/0361526X.2019.1637387
dc.relation/*ref*/Vàzquez, M., Ardanuy, J., López-Borrull, A., & Ollé, C. (2019). Scientific output in library and information science: A comparative study of the journals Anales de Documentación and BiD textos universitaris en biblioteconomia i documentació. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 51(2), 440–457. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0961000617729199
dc.relation/*ref*/Wu, X., Fu, Q., & Rousseau, R. (2008). On indexing in the Web of Science and predicting journal impact factor. Journal of Zhejiang University SCIENCE B, 9(7), 582-290. doi: 10.1631/jzus.B0840001
dc.relation/*ref*/Zhang, Y. (2014). The development of library and information science in China (1840–2009). IFLA Journal, 40(4), 296-306. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0340035214541033
dc.rightsDerechos de autor 2020 Kim M. Thompson, Kasey Garrison, Carolina Santelices-Werchez, Paulina Arellano-Rojas, Danilo Reyes-Lilloes-ES
dc.rightshttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0es-ES
dc.sourcee-Ciencias de la Información; Volume 10, issue 2: July-december 2020en-US
dc.sourcee-Ciencias de la Información; Volumen 10, número 2: julio-diciembre 2020pt-PT
dc.source1659-4142
dc.subjectBibliometric studiesen-US
dc.subjectScientific productionen-US
dc.subjectInformation scienceen-US
dc.subjectLibrary scienceen-US
dc.subjectWeb of Scienceen-US
dc.subjectScholarly Collaborationen-US
dc.subjectEstudios bibliométricoses-ES
dc.subjectProducción científicaes-ES
dc.subjectCiencias de la informaciónes-ES
dc.subjectBibliotecologíaes-ES
dc.subjectWeb of Sciencees-ES
dc.subjectColaboración Científicaes-ES
dc.title“Library and Information Science” Literature in Web of Science: What a Decade Tells Us About Scholarly Collaboration in the Field (2007-2016)en-US
dc.titleLiteratura sobre “Bibliotecología y Ciencias de la Información” en Web of Science: Qué nos dice una década sobre la colaboración académica en el campo (2007-2016)es-ES
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
Files