Examination of correlates of H-index as a measure of research productivity for library and information science faculty in the United States and Canada

2019 ◽  
Vol 120 (2) ◽  
pp. 897-915 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brady Lund
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Research Productivity ◽  
Information Science ◽  
The United States ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
Science Faculty ◽  
H Index

Understanding Twitter use by major LIS professional organisations in the United States

2017 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 165-183 ◽  
Author(s):  
Min Zhang ◽  
Feng-Ru Sheu ◽  
Yin Zhang
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Science Education ◽  
Information Science ◽  
American Library Association ◽  
The United States ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
Analysis Framework ◽  
Network Analytics ◽  
User Influence ◽  
Twitter Analysis

Although Twitter has been widely adopted by professional organisations, there has been a lack of understanding and research on its utilisation. This article presents a study that looks into how five major library and information science (LIS) professional organisations in the United States use Twitter, including the American Library Association (ALA), Special Libraries Association (SLA), Association for Library and Information Science Education (ALISE), Association for Information Science and Technology (ASIS&T) and the iSchools. Specifically explored are the characteristics of Twitter usage, such as prevalent topics or contents, type of users involved, as well as the user influence based on number of mentions and retweets. The article also presents the network interactions among the LIS associations on Twitter. A systematic Twitter analysis framework of descriptive analytics, content analytics, user analysis and network analytics with relevant metrics used in this study can be applied to other studies of Twitter use.

Trends in Academic Achievement Within Otolaryngology: Does Fellowship Training Impact Research Productivity?

2021 ◽  
pp. 194589242110547
Author(s):  
David C. Moffatt ◽  
Andrew M. Ferry ◽  
Jared M. Stuart ◽  
Jesse D. Supernaw ◽  
Alex E. Wright ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Research Productivity ◽  
Research Output ◽  
The United States ◽  
Fellowship Training ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
H Index ◽  
Cross Sectional Analysis ◽  
Scholarly Impact ◽  
Sectional Analysis

Background Scholarly productivity and research output vary among different subspecialties. The h-index was developed as a more wholesome metric that measures an author's contribution to literature. Objective Through a web-based cross-sectional analysis, we investigated the differences in scholarly impact and influence of both fellowship and nonfellowship-trained academic otolaryngologists in the United States. A secondary objective was to further understand the output among the larger fellowship fields. Methods A cross-sectional analysis was performed for active faculty otolaryngologists. A total of 1704 otolaryngologists were identified as faculty in residency training programs across the United States. Their h-index and publication data were gathered using the Scopus database. The data were obtained in August 2019 and analysis occurred in January 2020. Results Head and neck surgical faculty (25.5%) had the highest representation with fellowship experience. Among all faculty, there was no statistical difference in the overall average h-index scores when comparing faculty that had fellowship training with those who did not (12.6 and 12.1, respectively, P = .498). Rhinologists had the highest publication output per year at 3.90. Among fellowship-trained faculty, the highest average h-index and total publications were seen in head & neck surgery, while facial plastics had the lowest averages ( P < .001). Conclusions In this study, fellowship-trained faculty had a greater but not significant scholarly impact than nonfellowship faculty. Furthermore, there were significant variations in output among the various subspecialties of otolaryngology. Growing fields, as academic rhinology, are continuing to flourish in robust research productivity and output. This study further demonstrates the potential, growing influence of fellowship training on research involvement and academic advancement within the otolaryngology subspecialties.

scholarly journals Core Journals in Library and Information Science: Developing a Methodology for Ranking LIS Journals

2014 ◽  
Vol 75 (1) ◽  
pp. 66-90 ◽  
Author(s):  
Judith M. Nixon
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Information Science ◽  
The United States ◽  
Library Science ◽  
Academic Disciplines ◽  
Impact Factors ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
University Libraries ◽  
Short List ◽  
Science Field

In the library science field, there is no professionally accepted tiered list of journals in the United States to guide librarians, as there is in other academic disciplines. This situation creates a challenge for both new and experienced librarians who wish to make a serious contribution to librarianship by publishing articles. This article outlines a methodology used at the Libraries of Purdue University, which could be adapted by other university libraries, to create a tiered list of journals tailored to the institution. The article begins with a literature review that identifies a short list of top-level journals. This is followed by the methodology that uses expert opinion surveys, acceptance and circulation rates, impact factors, h-indexes, and journals with local faculty articles. Tables with the journals ranked into three tiers are included.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document