Intellectual freedom and alternative priorities in library and information science research: A longitudinal study

IFLA Journal ◽  
2022 ◽  
pp. 034003522110611
Author(s):  
Gabriel J Gardner

This article presents a bibliometric analysis of the library and information science literature to trace the emphasis that intellectual freedom and neutrality have received relative to an index of alternative and possibly competing topics. Emphasis is captured longitudinally by recording the number of results for various search terms associated with intellectual freedom, neutrality, diversity, equity, and inclusion in Web of Science from 1993 through 2020 and Library, Information Science and Technology Abstracts from 1970 through 2020. The results show that the number of works mentioning intellectual freedom and neutrality has increased only slightly over the study period, in sharp contrast to many entries on the diversity, equity, and inclusion index. With research interests being partially indicative of personal beliefs and professional activity, the impact of this relative change in emphasis on professional practice is discussed. Public controversies regarding library neutrality, intellectual freedom, and freedom of expression in libraries are summarized.

2020 ◽  
pp. 096100062092193
Author(s):  
Nadeem Siddique ◽  
Shafiq Ur Rehman ◽  
Muhammad Ajmal Khan ◽  
Asif Altaf

This article reviews 62 years (1957–2018) of research in library and information science in Pakistan. A comprehensive bibliometric study was conducted using the four leading databases (Web of Science, Scopus, Library and Information Science Abstracts, and Library, Information Science and Technology Abstracts). The researchers found a positive upward trend. Library research is on the rise in Pakistan. The Department of Information Management at the University of the Punjab is the major contributor to the library and information science literature. Forty percent of the total publications were published in two Pakistani journals. Older and well-established institutions like the University of the Punjab and the University of Karachi have taken the lead in publishing research. The Baluchistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa provinces require more focus and funding.


2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-63
Author(s):  
K. C. Garg ◽  
Rahul Kumar Singh

The paper analysed 699 papers published in Library & Information Science Research (LISR) during the period of 1994-2020. Google Scholar was used to obtain the number of citations received by these papers until April 30, 2021. The study examined the geographical distribution of published articles and also identified prolific institutions and authors. The study examined the impact of output of countries, institutions and authors using citation per paper (CPP) and i-10 index as indicators of impact. The study also examined the pattern of growth and identified the highly cited papers. Based on the analysis of data it is observed that maximum articles were published during the three years block of 2015-2017. The geographical distribution of output indicates that 51 countries contributed the 699 papers. Highest number of papers was contributed by authors from the USA though it had a low value of CPP in comparison to Norway and Finland. Among the institutions, Florida State University (USA) topped the list. However, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA had the highest value of CPP. During the period of study, 1,389 papers received 74,061 citations, of which only 41 (3 %) articles remained uncited.


Author(s):  
Kim M. Thompson ◽  
Kasey Garrison ◽  
Carolina Santelices-Werchez ◽  
Paulina Arellano-Rojas ◽  
Danilo Reyes-Lillo

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.


2020 ◽  
Vol 69 (8/9) ◽  
pp. 653-664
Author(s):  
Yingqi Tang ◽  
Hungwei Tseng ◽  
Charlcie Vann

Purpose The purpose of the study is to use a multidimensional perspective on the analysis of scholarly articles published in the top-tier Library and Information Science (LIS) journals. The relationships between the impact factors (Altmetric attention score [AAS], citation count and Mendeley readership) were analyzed, and reader profiles were characterized and studied. Design/methodology/approach This paper examined citation count, AAS and Mendeley readership of the most cited articles published in the top-tier LIS journals – The Journal of Academic Librarianship, Government Information Quarterly and Library and Information Science Research. A total of 61 articles were analyzed. Data were recorded on an Excel spreadsheet and exported to the statistical software package SPSS 18.0 for Windows to perform the descriptive and correlation analysis. Findings This study suggests that Mendeley readership and AAS could be used as supplemental measurements for assessing the impact of a publication or author in the LIS. AAS and Mendeley readership are positively correlated with citation count, and the correlation between Mendeley readership and citation count was stronger than AAS and citation count. Librarians are dominant readers of the top-tier LIS journals, followed by social sciences, computer science and arts and humanities professions. Originality/value This study introduces two newly launched metrics for measuring the research impact factor and discusses how they correlated with citation count. Moreover, the study details the spectrum of Altmetric for discovering readership of LIS top-tier journals. To the best of authors’ knowledge, this is the first study that presents the spectrum of AAS and Mendeley readership of the most cited articles published in top-tier of LIS journals. The study reveals an alternative way of measuring LIS publication’s impact factor that enables researchers, librarians, administrators, publishers and other stakeholders in LIS to assess the influence of a publication from another angle.


2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 91 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annemaree Lloyd

Information literacy (IL) research tends to fall into one of two spaces. In the conceptual space the research concern rests with understanding the experience and core elements of the practice and how it emerges. In the practical space the execution and outcome of the practice as markers of successful teaching and learning are the focus. The division between these spaces and the lack of researcher/practitioner convergence create a conundrum that limits our ability to theorise IL, to adequately situate IL in library and information science research, to champion its benefits outside the library and information science field, or to promote to funding bodies the impact of IL. To address this conundrum a theory and foundational model of IL is described which attempts to reconstruct the IL space and its enactments without privileging research or practice.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document