Tematyka archiwalna na łamach czasopisma „African Journal of Library, Archives and Information Science” w latach 2000–2024

Citation analysis of all the journal articles published in the journal of Library and Information Science (JOLIS) from 2004-2009 is carried out. 72 articles were published in the journal during five (5) years covered. Highest number of (14) articles were published in 2007 and 2008.A total of 998 references were generated by the journals, indicating that 13.7 average citation per articles. The result shows that journals were the most cited materials as it accounted for 37.14% of the total citations, followed by books with 33.14%. The individual articles that had the highest citation had 44 references and was published in 2008. The findings further show that 62 library and information science (LIS) journals cited produced 172 citations. African Journal of Library, Archives and Information science led the ten (10) most cited library and information science journals (LIS) with 40 citations in the journal. 15(24.19%) of the (LIS) journals were published in Nigeria, 45(72.58%) were from outside African continent, while only 2 (3.22%) other journals were from Africa. The majority (38.2%) of materials cited was published in 1995 and beyond, authorship pattern shows that (79.85%) of the materials cited was written by single authors while only 8.8% of the total citations were Internet resources.

This study employs the method of direct citation to analyze and compare the interdisciplinary characteristics of the two disciplines of library science and information science during the period of 1978---2007. Based on the research generated by five library science journals and five information science journals, library science researchers tend to cite publications from library and information science (LIS), education, business/management, sociology, and psychology, while researchers of information science tend to cite more publications from LIS, general science, computer science, technology, and medicine. This means that the disciplines with larger contributions to library science are almost entirely different from those contributing to information science. In addition, researchers of library science frequently cite publications from LIS; the rate is as high as 65.61%, which is much higher than the rate for information science, 49.50%. However, a decreasing trend in the percentage of LIS in library science indicates that library science researchers tend to cite more publications from non-LIS disciplines. A rising trend in the proportion of references to education sources is reported for library science articles, while a rising trend in the proportion of references to computer science sources has been found for information science articles. In addition, this study applies an interdisciplinary indicator, Brillouin's Index, to measurement of the degree of interdisciplinarity. The results confirm that the trend toward interdisciplinarity in both information science and library science has risen over the years, although the degree of interdisciplinarity in information science is higher than that in library science.

By examining the references of research and specific topic articles of JASIST, this study explored the disciplines and subjects relating to information science. According to the website of JASIST, there are 1,341 research and specific topic articles with 51,359 references during the period of 1998 to 2008. Since journal articles and monographs are cited by JASIST most, the citation analysis of this study will focus on these two document type references only. Firstly, this study applies the Bradford's Law and Bradford-Zipf's Law to identify the core journals which were cited by JASIST. Then, search the classification number and subject categories of WorldCat and Ulrichsweb.com and also the descriptors of LISA to analyze cited references. Followings are the research results: 一、JASIS(T) published 2,031 articles from 1998 to 2008, with an average number of 185 per year. Among them, 1,341articles are research and specific topic paper, contributing 66.02% of all published items. Journal articles and monographs are two most cited reference for research and specific topic articles. 二、JASIS(T) has cited a total of 27,115 journal literature, distributing over 2,994 journals. By applying the Bradford's Law, there are four core journals cited by JASIS(T). However, by applying the Bradford-Zipf's Law, there appears to be ten core journals. The journal that had been cited the most is JASIS(T) itself (17.47% of all citations), suggesting JASIS(T)'s self-citation is obvious. 三、For journals cited by the JASIS(T), bibliography. library science. information resources (general), science, and social sciences are the three most cited disciplines. The most commonly cited subjects, which identified from WorldCat and Ulrichsweb.com, are information science, information technology, information storage and retrieval systems, library science, and science. However, searching, online information retrieval, information work, subject indexing, and information storage and retrieval, which searched from LISA, are the most cited descriptors of the library and information science journals cited by JASIS(T). 四、JASIS(T) has cited a total of 27,115 monograph literature, distributing over 5,565 books. Introduction to Modern Information Retrieval written by Salton & McGill was cited the most. Three of the top ten cited monographs are written by Salton. It may suggest that Salton is one of the most influential authors in the field of information science. In addition, 91% of the books cited by JASIS(T) less than 3 times indicates that JASIS(T) cited monographs diversified. 五、For monographs cited by the JASIS(T), science, social sciences, and bibliography. library science. information resources (general) are the three most cited disciplines. The most commonly cited subjects, which identified from WorldCat and Ulrichsweb.com, are information storage and retrieval systems, human-computer interaction, information retrieval, information science, and cognition. 六、From comprehensive analysis on the discipline of the journals and monographs cited by JASIS(T), it can be found that bibliography. library science. information resources (general), science, and social sciences are the most cited disciplines by JASIS(T). In the other words, these three disciplines are not only the most influential resources, but also are closely related to information science.

This study examines the proportion of women as first authors in major library and information science (LIS) journals over the years 1981–2020. Author name and year data were collected for 10 LIS journals – five that are associated more with library topics and five with information science topics – and analysed using the genderize.io tool. Both general trends over time and comparisons of information science versus library science journals are presented. The findings indicate significant growth in the proportion of women authors among the LIS journals, but primarily concentrated only among the library science journals, with information science journals falling well behind. Representation of women authors (~60%) still lags well below the overall representation of women in librarianship (~80%). These findings suggest that there is still considerable growth needed to decrease the gender gap among authorship in top LIS journals.

RETRACTED: Measurement and analysis of Chinese journal discriminative capacity

Although there are journals whose published papers are cited evenly, there may be journals whose impact factors (IF) are distorted by a few popular papers. This study measures the citation inequality in papers published in 44 international journals in the field of library and information science using the Gini Coefficient and analyzes whether there are differences in citation distribution depending on the research areas of Library Science (LS), Information Science (IS), and Scientometrics (SM). Moreover, it explores whether the citation inequality index was related to the journal’s IF and whether the IF was distorted by a few popular papers. Analysis revealed that first, the inequality in the number of citations of papers included in library and information science (LIS) journals was found to be g = 0.62. Moreover, if the IF is high, the Gini coefficient is low, therefore the number of citations becomes even (r = −0.367, p < 0.05). Additionally, it was confirmed that equality increased as the non-citation rate decreased. Second, there was a significant difference in the Gini coefficients of papers included in journals in the LS, IS, and SM fields (p < 0.05). The number of citations of papers included in SM journals was the most even (g = 0.5), whereas LS journals had the most uneven citation distribution (g = 0.7). Third, even in LIS journals, we found cases in which journal IF inflation occurred because of a few highly cited papers. This phenomenon has been observed in journals including COVID-19 related topics or bibliometric methodologies that attracted attention.

The purpose of the article is to explore the experience and to identify the best practices for modernizing the content and organizational structure of multilevel training of librarians in China. The methodology. The study has used a systematic approach, which allowed to consider all components of the Chinese higher education in the specialties “Library, Archive and Information Science”, to establish the continuity of educational levels of librarians, to find out the factors determining the training system’s modernization. There was carried out comparative and content analysis of the Bachelor’s, Master’s and Doctoral higher education levels educational programs, implemented by Chinese universities in the specialty “Library Science”, “Information Management and Information Systems”. This allowed to determine the general and the specifics of the Information Field Science training in the People’s Republic of China (PRC), to establish interdisciplinarity educational components, to substantiate the objective strengthening of the information component in the content of higher education in library science. The results. The article has looked into the content and structure of 227 different levels educational programs (EP) of the information specialists training, with 41% of them being the Bachelor’s level EP, 49% — Master’s, and 9% — Educational-Scientific Programs (ESP) for the Doctor of Management degree (an equivalent to the Doctor of Philosophy) in Information Sciences, provided in 108 universities in China. There were clarified the EP peculiarities: about 40% of them are programs dedicated to Information Management and Information Systems (Program in Information Management &amp; Information Systems); 35% — EP in Library Science (Program in Library Science); 31.5% — EP in Archive Science (Program in Archive Science). In terms of content, most EPs are interdisciplinary, which is due to the national information infrastructure digitalization and the focus of its components to support the basic technological processes of the information management life cycle. It is established that Chinese universities adhere to the IFLA Guidelines for Professional Library and Information Science (LIS) Educational Programs. The scientific topicality. It is substantiated that in the digital information market the content of modern librarian training should be updated with such relevant interdisciplinary educational components as: “Principles of competitive intelligence and artificial intelligence”, “Electronic library and consolidated information management”, “Intelligent control systems”, “Information security systems”, “Economics of Management and Information Industry”, “Methods of data mining”, “Knowledge extraction and management”, “Analysis and design of information systems”. The practical significance. Ukrainian institutions of higher education when improving educational programs in the can use the study results. Addressing to the best foreign practices of the library specialists training will allow increasing their competitiveness in the world information market and promoting better efficiency of the Ukrainian libraries work in the conditions of the society digitalization.

Altmetrics indicators are useful for assessing the impact of research and have been increasingly used alongside traditional citations in recent years. Mendeley provides readership statistics which give an early indicator of the impact of research outputs. This study aimed to investigate how Mendeley early readership indicator was associated with later citations across nine selected library and information science (LIS) journals. This study examined bibliographic data of 9 LIS journals extracted from the Scopus database over a 17 months period from June 2019 to November 2020. Data were extracted using Webometric Analyst. Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient was used to characterize the relationship between these two variables. The number of readers per paper, and of each journal are described using mean, standard deviation, frequency, and geometric mean. Readership growth was increased in all selected journals, but citation growth was unstable in most of the journals. Early readership statistics positively correlated with early citation analysis in all journals except the Journal of Educational Media and Library Science, which had a weaker positive correlation. The correlation between early readership and later citation numbers varied, with some journals being moderately positive and some weakly positive.

The purpose of this paper was to identify the existing criteria of various conventional databases that are considered in evaluating journals in the scholarship of library & information science (LIS) journals and accordingly developed a tool box to evaluate some selected journals of LIS in South Asian Association of Regional Cooperation (SAARC) countries. Journals have been evaluated by applying 30 criteria based on the current measures used by Thompson Reuter, SCOPUS, SciELO, LISA, LISTA, etc. The result indicates that although there are a considerable number of journals being published in India since long time, only a few journals are qualitatively strong. The review policy as mentioned in documentation, subject coverage can be considered as their strength, the geographic non-diversity of members in Editorial Board, contributors are their weakness. Most of journals are indexed in LISA and LISTA, however no journals are yet to include in JCR. Overall, to cope-up with international standard journals need to consider their publication policy thoroughly. The findings of the study seems to be useful for (a) academics – to know the list of journals which adhere to the quality requirements of LIS discipline; (b) librarians – to know the core LIS journals of SAARC countries in LIS discipline for their clients; (c) policy makers – to measure the weightage of publication, while evaluating performance for career and promotion, to evaluate individual research performance, while releasing grants for academic projects. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology , 2014, 34(2), pp. 152-161. http://dx.doi.org/10.14429/djlit.34.4968

Previous articleNext article No AccessResearch in PracticeDiversity, Inclusion, and Underrepresented Populations in LIS ResearchPaul T. Jaeger, John Carlo Bertot, and Renee E. FranklinPaul T. Jaeger1. Assistant professor and director of the Center for Information Policy and Electronic Government, College of Information Studies, University of Maryland. Search for more articles by this author , John Carlo Bertot Search for more articles by this author , and Renee E. Franklin3. Assistant professor, School of Information Studies, Syracuse University. Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUSFull Text Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The Library Quarterly Volume 80, Number 2April 2010 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/651053 Views: 688Total views on this site Citations: 22Citations are reported from Crossref © 2010 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved.PDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Raj Kumar Bhardwaj Information system for visually impaired in Indian universities: a user’s perspectives, Information Discovery and Delivery 50, no.33 (Oct 2021): 312–325.https://doi.org/10.1108/IDD-05-2021-0053Xiaoai Ren, Nicole D. Alemanne, Lenese M. Colson How MLIS Programs Prepare Students to Serve Diverse Populations: The North American Context, Journal of Education for Library and Information Science 63, no.33 (May 2022): 301–320.https://doi.org/10.3138/jelis-2021-0021Muhammad Asim Qayyum, Mohamed Taher How LAM Sector Can Improve Quality of Life for Underserved Groups via a Whole Person Approach, (Jan 2022): 283–294.https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-8363-0.ch015Iris Xie, Rakesh Babu, Tae Hee Lee, Shengang Wang, Hyun Seung Lee Coping tactics of blind and visually impaired users: Responding to help-seeking situations in the digital library environment, Information Processing & Management 58, no.55 (Sep 2021): 102612.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2021.102612Iris Xie, Rakesh Babu, Hyun Seung Lee, Shengang Wang, Tae Hee Lee Orientation tactics and associated factors in the digital library environment: Comparison between blind and sighted users, Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 72, no.88 (Mar 2021): 995–1010.https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24469Alex H. Poole, Denise Agosto, Jane Greenberg, Xia Lin, Erjia Yan Where Do We Stand? Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Social Justice in North American Library and Information Science Education, Journal of Education for Library and Information Science 62, no.33 (Jul 2021): 258–286.https://doi.org/10.3138/jelis.2020-0018Jodie Boyd, Ian McShane The ‘Difficult Balance Between Equity and Differentiation’: Developing a Transformative Praxis, Journal of the Australian Library and Information Association 70, no.11 (Mar 2021): 3–20.https://doi.org/10.1080/24750158.2021.1880357Rebecca Muir, Kim M. Thompson, Asim Qayyum The Diversity We Seek: A Document Analysis of Diversity and Inclusion in the Australian Library and Information Sector Job Advertisements, Journal of the Australian Library and Information Association 69, no.44 (Oct 2020): 473–495.https://doi.org/10.1080/24750158.2020.1812023Iris Xie, Rakesh Babu, Tae Hee Lee, Melissa Davey Castillo, Sukjin You, Ann M Hanlon Enhancing usability of digital libraries: Designing help features to support blind and visually impaired users, Information Processing & Management 57, no.33 (May 2020): 102110.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2019.102110Marta Bladek Latino students and the academic library: A primer for action, The Journal of Academic Librarianship 45, no.11 (Jan 2019): 50–57.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2018.12.001Jonas Söderholm Tool lending librarianship, Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 50, no.44 (Sep 2016): 374–385.https://doi.org/10.1177/0961000616666627Keren DaliNadia Caidi Diversity by Design, The Library Quarterly 87, no.22 (Mar 2017): 88–98.https://doi.org/10.1086/690735Hui-Yun Sung, Paul Parboteeah Diversity-related research reported in high-impact library and information science journal literature: A content analysis, Library & Information Science Research 39, no.22 (Apr 2017): 77–84.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2017.03.002Paul T. Jaeger, Diane L. Barlow, Beth St. Jean The Arc of Activism: The James Partridge Award in the Context of 50 Years of Attempts to Influence Diversity and Inclusion in the Field of Library and Information Science by the University of Maryland, (Dec 2016): 21–32.https://doi.org/10.1108/S0065-283020160000042003Paul T. Jaeger, Renee F. Hill The Long Walk: Diversity in Information Studies Educational Programs, Professions, and Institutions, (Dec 2016): 209–215.https://doi.org/10.1108/S0065-283020160000042020Fiona Jardine The Role of Students in Diversity and Inclusion in Library and Information Science, (Feb 2016): 399–416.https://doi.org/10.1108/S0065-283020160000041016Nadia Caidi, Keren Dali Can we talk?, New Library World 116, no.11/1211/12 (Nov 2015): 748–780.https://doi.org/10.1108/NLW-08-2015-0056Paul T. JaegerLindsay C. SarinKaitlin J. Peterson Diversity, Inclusion, and Library and Information Science: An Ongoing Imperative (or Why We Still Desperately Need to Have Discussions about Diversity and Inclusion), The Library Quarterly 85, no.22 (Oct 2015): 127–132.https://doi.org/10.1086/680151Paul T. JaegerJohn Carlo BertotMega Subramaniam Preparing Future Librarians to Effectively Serve Their Communities, The Library Quarterly 83, no.33 (Jul 2015): 243–248.https://doi.org/10.1086/670699Mega M. Subramaniam, Howard Rodriguez-Mori, Paul T. Jaeger, and Renee Franklin Hill The Implications of a Decade of Diversity-Related Doctoral Dissertations (2000–2009) in LIS: Supporting Inclusive Library Practices, The Library Quarterly 82, no.33 (Jul 2015): 361–377.https://doi.org/10.1086/665931David Baker, Wendy Evans Libraries, society and social responsibility, (Jan 2011): 1–16.https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-84334-131-4.50001-7Charlotte L. V. Thoms, Sharon L. Burton Understanding the Impact of Inclusion in Disability Studies Education, (): 186–213.https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-7324-3.ch008

Teza/cel: Celem artykułu jest diagnoza powodów, dla których na ministerialnej liście (2019) najważniejsze międzynarodowe pisma z zakresu Library &amp; Information Science (LIS) zajęły relatywnie niskie pozycje, a następnie prezentacja ich wykazu uzyskanego wg autorskiej metody. Metody badań: Do wyłonienia czasopism wykorzystano metody bibliometryczne (analizę cytowań, analizę wskaźników oraz badanie korelacji). Wyniki: W pierwszej części artykułu przestawiono genezę ministerialnej listy; omówiono technikę jej tworzenia oraz ustalono jaki wpływ na listę miało mapowanie pomiędzy LIS a indeksami cytowań oraz czasopisma należące do wielu dyscyplin. W drugiej części zaprezentowano nową metodę tworzenia wykazu (bazując na założeniu, że o przynależności do dyscypliny decyduje uzus) oraz wyniki badań. Materiał badawczy liczył 77 czasopism wybranych z Web o Science i Scopus. W wyniku obliczeń zbiór ten podzielono na trzy grupy: a) pisma podstawowe dla LIS (26 tytułów); b) pisma z dyscyplin towarzyszących formalnie należące do LIS (26); c) pisma multidyscyplinarne formalnie należące do LIS (25). Wnioski: Badania ujawniły, że jedynie 33,8% czasopism przypisanych do LIS jest realnie cytowanych przez uczonych publikujących w periodykach z zakresu LIS. Pozostałe tytuły są użytkowne przez badaczy z innych dyscyplin (33,8%) albo mają charakter multidyscyplinarny (32,4%). Wśród 26 najważniejszych czasopism LIS wydzielono 3 typy periodyków: czasopisma ogólne (9 tytułów), periodyki poświęcone informacji naukowej (9) i pisma sprofilowane (8). Porównawcza analiza metryk przekonuje, że pisma należące do rdzenia dyscypliny (podstawowe dla LIS) osiągają niższe wskaźniki bibliometryczne niż pozostałe pisma formalnie przypisane do LIS. Całość wyzyskanych wniosków świadczy, że tematyczne listy czasopism publikowanych przez indeksy cytowań są niekoherentne i nie powinny być wprost stosowane do ewaluacji dyscyplin naukowych.

About Our Authors

On behalf of the chairman, Prof. Abbas Haghparast, and the editorial board of the journal, I proudly announce Iran's first English-language journal in the medical library and information science area. The Journal of Medical Library and Information Science (JMLIS) is a peer-review and an open- access scientific journal that aims to publish a variety of articles by librarians, researchers, faculty members, and students of the medical library and information science. The articles accepted by the journal include research / original article, review article, letter to the editor, commentary, and case report. The journal scope includes all aspects of the medical libraries and health information sciences and related topics. The decision to publish this journal was made due to the lack of English-language journals in the field of medical library and information science in Iran; however, the journal aims to move beyond national boundaries. We are confident that the contribution and participation of Iranian researchers in this field, as well as other countries, will improve the journal's quality so that we can soon see the journal indexed in reputable national and international databases. This journal is the result of the outstanding efforts of teamwork for almost three years. The initial idea of the publishing the journal was discussed by the specialized council of the Central Library of Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences (SBMU) along with the faculty members of the Medical Library and Information Science Department of SBMU. Many face-to-face and online meetings were held by the Central Library Management, faculty members of the Medical Library and Information Science Department, and the SBMU-journals consultant, during these years to make it possible for the journal to be published in the best possible way. Besides, the publication of this journal owes much to the endless efforts of many colleagues. I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Prof. Zarghi, Vice-Chancellor of Research and Technology of SBMU for his endless support, as well as Director of Scientific Resources and Central Library of the SBMU, Chairman of the JMLIS, Editorial board members, Executive staff of the JMLIS, the faculty members of the Department of Medical Library and Information Science of SBMU and esteemed authors and reviewers of the articles, who sincerely devoted their time to realize this project. Being a professional and having a moral and scientific commitment to work without any expectations were all colleagues' characteristics that made them stand together like team members, and eliminating even one individual from this team leads to a significant gap in it. Undoubtedly, to continue this path, we need the cooperation of all professors, students, researchers, medical librarians, and health information specialists from Iran and other countries. It is hoped that publishing this journal can be a step towards promoting the medical library and information science to provide better services to the medical community.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to define big data and draw its deep understanding. Moreover, trends of big data research in the field of library and information management are explored. With the purpose to explore the research trends, papers indexed in Thomson Reuters’ ISI Web of Knowledge were analyzed.Design/methodology/approachIt is a literature-based and scientometric paper. A formal definition is constructed through a review of literature. Moreover, scientometric analysis of papers indexed in Thomson Reuters’ ISI Web of Knowledge has been done to explore the research trends associated with big data in the field of library and information science, using Vosviewer software.FindingsThe findings of the study indicate the reshaped definition of big data. The findings further indicate major research trends associated with big data. The analysis indicated “Risk”, “Industry”, “Market”, “Creditworthiness” and “Big Data Analytics”, the most repeated research trends associated with big data.Practical implicationsThe paper sums up the learnings required to be a successful data-literate manager. First, the study defines big data. Second, the study describes current research trends associated with big data. Third, on the basis of the explored trends, data managers and library and information management professionals are guided about the learnings they require to be a successful data manager. Where thousands of data-literate managers are predicted to require in future, the present study is a guide to trends associated with big data.Originality/valueIt is a first study of its type which provides a reshaped definition of big data. It portrays its landscape and associated research trends in the field of information and library management (ILM).

The advent of the computer and Internet impacted the field of library and information science to a greater extent and libraries are always in the forefront in implementing new tools and technologies to ensure effective and efficient services to the clients. This paper attempts to profile some of the emerging trends and technologies in the field of library and information science such as automation, digitization, consortia, RFID enabled security systems, remote login, Internet of Things (IoT), Big data, makerspaces, library bookmark apps, User-focused interfaces and application, drones, Artificial Intelligence, Blockchain technology, Augmented reality, digital interfaces for print books, etc. Keywords: Library Science, Emerging Technologies, automation, digitization, consortia, RFID, remote login, Internet of Things, Big data, makerspaces, Apps, drones, Artificial Intelligence, Blockchain technology, Augmented reality, digital interfaces for print books. Cite this Article K. Veeranjaneyulu. Emerging Technologies in The Field of Library and Information Science: An Overview. Journal of Advancements in Library Sciences . 2019; 6(Special Issue 1): 430s–435s.