Information Science Journals Research Articles

JCISE Editorial Board - Year 2023

Abstract The Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering (JCISE) publishes articles related to scientific computing methods (e.g., modeling, simulation, representation, algorithm) and computational tools (e.g., high-performance computing, virtual and augmented reality) that aim to improve engineering products and systems for their complete lifecycle (e.g., design, manufacturing, operation, maintenance, disposal, and recycling). The interest areas include computational geometry, computer-aided design and manufacturing, cyber-physical systems, human-machine interface, machine intelligence, machine learning, modeling and simulation, precision engineering, product lifecycle management, reverse engineering, and systems engineering.

A revisit to the specification of sub-datasets and corresponding coverage timespans when using Web of Science Core Collection

Many papers used the Web of Science Core Collection (WOSCC) as the data source. The work by Liu (2019, Scientometrics) revealed that only 48 % of such papers published in information science and library science journals during 2017–2018 specified which sub-datasets they used, and subsequently urged researchers to provide such information together with the corresponding coverage timespans to improve transparency and reproducibility. This work revisited this issue to reveal if the current condition has improved following Liu's recommendations. Using WOSCC, 934 bibliometric open-access papers published during 2020–2022 in non-information science and library science journals were evaluated. Of these 934 papers, 45.0 % specified the sub-datasets of WOSCC they used for data collection, and 4.8 % specified the coverage timespan(s) of corresponding sub-datasets or the overall dataset. There seemed to be no improvement in the specification of data source using WOSCC.

Special Issue: Challenges and Opportunities in Computing Research to Enable Next-Generation Engineering Applications

Abstract Recent advances in computing and information science such as artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning (ML), edge computing, cloud computing, metacomputing, and quantum computing are creating new computing paradigms. These advances are providing new opportunities for new research and application development. For instance, the adoption of Industry 4.0 enabled by AI/ML is fundamentally changing how products are designed, manufactured, maintained, and recycled. It enables consideration of all aspects of the product life cycle and realizing sustainable designs and helps us in achieving carbon neutrality. Intelligent machines such as robots and autonomous vehicles are revolutionizing human-machine interactions and increasing digitalization in the manufacturing and transportation industries. It is important for the Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering (JCISE) community to identify challenges and opportunities in these emerging areas and inspire new researchers to join the field and become a part of the community. This Special Issue consists of 19 position papers that span a wide variety of topics of interest to the JCISE community. These position papers identify challenges and opportunities, outline new areas of research, and point out new applications that will be enabled by advances in this field.

Transparency in the Application of Theoretical Frameworks to the Advancement of Knowledge in Selected Library and Information Science Journals: A Systematic Review

The purpose of this systematic review was to determine the extent of theoretical transparency in library and information science (LIS) scholarship. Many studies have looked at theorising and the use of theory in LIS. Unlike previous studies this research provides insights into transparency in the use of theoretical frameworks in the LIS field. Transparency is essential because different researchers employ the terms theory, theoretical framework, and conceptual framework in various ways.The transparent use of theory and the resultant theoretical framework enables other researchers to assess whether the theory is appropriate, consistent, and coherent with the empirical evidence. This systematic search followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for reporting on systematic reviews supported by ADIMA®. A total number of 138 out of 2029 articles from 12 LIS-focused journals were analysed in March 2023. Most of the articles (88.6%) specified the framework they used. There was a high level of transparency in relation to the suitability of the theory to address the research problem. The degree of openness about the aim to utilise a theoretical or conceptual framework was moderate to high. The articles had a low or minimal level of transparency when it came to justifying why a certain theory was chosen for the study. Theory dropping was not apparent in the articles. The results from the articles demonstrate that LIS scholars appreciate that a theoretical framework or conceptual framework must be used in research. To ensure that readers understand the rationale behind the theories chosen for a study, it is necessary to be open about the reasons behind the selection of a particular theory. The explanation of how the theory contributed to explaining the phenomenon of interest is also essential. This article might help scholars get beyond theoretical obstacles related to the transparent use of a theoretical framework and produce theoretically sound research. It also opens discourse on “best practice” in the use of analytical tools forresearchin the advancement of knowledge.

The need to develop tailored tools for improving the quality of thematic bibliometric analyses: Evidence from papers published in Sustainability and Scientometrics

Abstract Purpose The aim of this article is to explore up to seven parameters related to the methodological quality and reproducibility of thematic bibliometric research published in the two most productive journals in bibliometrics, Sustainability (a journal outside the discipline) and Scientometrics, the flagship journal in the field. Design/methodology/approach The study identifies the need for developing tailored tools for improving the quality of thematic bibliometric analyses, and presents a framework that can guide the development of such tools. A total of 508 papers are analysed, 77% of Sustainability, and 23% published in Scientometrics, for the 2019-2021 period. Findings An average of 2.6 shortcomings per paper was found for the whole sample, with an almost identical number of flaws in both journals. Sustainability has more flaws than Scientometrics in four of the seven parameters studied, while Scientometrics has more shortcomings in the remaining three variables. Research limitations The first limitation of this work is that it is a study of two scientific journals, so the results cannot be directly extrapolated to the set of thematic bibliometric analyses published in journals from all fields. Practical implications We propose the adoption of protocols, guidelines, and other similar tools, adapted to bibliometric practice, which could increase the thoroughness, transparency, and reproducibility of this type of research. Originality/value These results show considerable room for improvement in terms of the adequate use and breakdown of methodological procedures in thematic bibliometric research, both in journals in the Information Science area and journals outside the discipline.

How to write a successful scholarly manuscript for high-impact library and information journals: Comprehensive Guidelines

This article provides comprehensive guidelines for writing successful scholarly manuscripts targeted at high-impact library and information science journals. The key to acceptance for publication lies in writing with simplicity, clarity, and logical coherence while avoiding verbosity and specialized terminology. In this paper, essential components of the manuscript are outlined, including the title page, abstract, keywords, introduction, main body, references, acknowledgments, tables, and figures as well as detailed guidelines on how to properly write those components. The significance of a well-crafted title and abstract is emphasized, different kinds of abstracts are recommended depending on the nature of the study. The selection of appropriate and accurate keywords is also discussed. The introduction is described as a window to give the reader context and background of the study. The literature review is expected to be comprehensive and addresses the gap in literature. The methods section should provide a clear description of the methods used, while avoiding the use of the term "methodology." This article aims to stress the importance of adhering to publication guidelines and completing all components of the research paper before submission. By following these guidelines, authors can increase the chances of their manuscript being accepted for publication in high-impact library and information science journals.

The Classification of Q1 SJR-Ranked Library and Information Science Journals by an AI-driven “Suspected Predatory” Journal Classifier

AbstractIn academic publishing, there is a need to be able to discern scholarly from unscholarly, deceptive, and/or predatory journals. Predatory journals are not expected among highly ranked journals in reputable databases. SCImago Journal Rank (SJR), which ranks journals into four quartiles (Q1–Q4), acts as a whitelist or safelist for journal selection. Q1 SJR-ranked journals are likely not “predatory.” An artificial intelligence (AI)-based tool Academic Journal Predatory Checking (AJPC) system launched in February 2023 claims to differentiate suspected predatory journals (SPJs) from normal journals. AJPC system classified, in a 2 June 2023 assessment, 27 (or 42%) of the 64 Q1 SJR-ranked library and information science journals, most (48%) published by Taylor & Francis, as SPJs. This output is unlikely to be accurate (or is likely to be inaccurate) and may suggest that this free online AI-driven tool, whose output can be independently verified by anybody, may be providing erroneous output, and thus misleading information.

Does funded research have a greater scholarly impact? A study of funded and non-funded research published in high-impact library and information science journals

Purpose This study aims to examine the scholarly impact of funded and non-funded research published in ten core library and information science (LIS) journals published in 2016. Design/methodology/approach In total, ten high-impact LIS journals were selected using Google Scholar metrics. The source title of each selected journal was searched in the Scopus database to retrieve the articles published in 2016. The detailed information of all the retrieved articles for every journal was exported in a CSV Excel file, and after collecting all the journal articles’ information, all CSV Excel files were merged into a single MS Excel file for data analysis. Findings The study analyzed 1,064 publications and found that 14% of them were funded research articles. Funded articles received higher average citation counts (24.56) compared to non-funded articles (20.49). Funded open-access articles had a higher scholarly impact than funded closed-access articles. The research area with the most funded articles was “Bibliometrics,” which also received the highest number of citations (1,676) with an average citation count of 24.64. The National Natural Science Foundation of China funded the most papers (30), while the USA funded the highest number of research publications (36) in the field of LIS. Practical implications This study highlights the importance of securing funding, open access publishing, discipline-specific differences, diverse funding sources and aiming for higher citations. Researchers, practitioners and policymakers can use these findings to enhance research impact in LIS. Originality/value This study explores the impact of funding on research LIS and provides valuable insights into the intricate relationship between funding and research impact.

Identifying Stylometric Characteristics of Domain Specific Texts Using Classification Algorithms: A Study of Library Science Articles published in 2020

Academic writing has played an essential role in communicating the cognitive aspects of the human mind. Natural Language Processing (NLP) tools enable us to examine linguistic knowledge. However, writing patterns and applicable linguistic characteristics differ geographically. The study's primary purpose is to understand the global writing pattern and linguistic diversities of research articles in the LIS domain. The corpus was identified from four SCOPUS-enrolled open-access libraries and information science journals. The journals published in India and outside India were selected for the study in 2020. The syntactic complexity in 147 text documents was measured using the Tool for the Automatic Analysis of Syntactic Sophistication and Complexity (TASSAC). The corpus was further examined using the Structural Equation Model (SEM) to determine the causal relationship among independent variables such as syntax features and readability scores. The results depict the differences in the patterning of syntactic features at both the global and national levels. Furthermore, the study allows us to see how linguistic diversity is underplayed in research writings and helps to understand writing patterns through cross-country comparisons. Furthermore, the paper employs model-based reasoning to identify global and national latent variables.

The Impact of Social Responsibility and Organizational Accountability on the Performance of Public Librarians in Iran

A Review of: Soltani-Nejad, N., Jahanshahi, M., Karim Saberi, M., Ansari, N., & Zarei-Maram, N. (2022). The relationship between social responsibility and public libraries accountability: The mediating role of professional ethics and conscientiousness. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 54(2), 306–324. https://doi.org/10.1177/09610006211014260 Objective – To determine how librarians' perceptions of public libraries' social responsibility and accountability within society affect their professional ethics and conscientiousness. Design – Quantitative, survey questionnaire. Setting – Public libraries in Iran. Subjects – Survey respondents (N=362) were public librarians* (see note below). Methods – The authors created a theoretical model based on six separate hypotheses, describing the relationship between the following variables: corporate social responsibility, organizational accountability, professional ethics, and conscientiousness. A questionnaire was distributed to the participants. SPSS 21.0 was used for the analysis of demographic data and SMART PLS 3.0 was used to assess the theoretical model. Main Results – The results show a significant, positive, and direct relationship between the variables being studied (corporate social responsibility, organizational accountability, professional ethics, and conscientiousness), therefore confirming the relevance of the authors’ theoretical model. Conclusion – The results of this study demonstrate the importance of promoting the social responsibility and organizational accountability efforts of public libraries. The data suggest that doing so will strengthen the positive perception of the library amongst employees, which will in turn have a positive effect on their professional ethics and conscientiousness. The authors suggest that library managers need to create a culture of accountability and ethics within libraries. They can do so by incorporating ethics and social responsibility in decision-making and policies. Additionally, the authors propose that professional ethics training in library curricula and continuing education would provide librarians with the knowledge necessary when encountering ethical dilemmas on the job.

Academic Librarians in Spanish-Speaking Latin America See a Growing Need for Librarian Role in Scholarly Publishing Literacy

A Review of:Buitrago Ciro, J. (2022). How are academic libraries in Spanish-speaking Latin America responding to new models of scholarly communication and predatory publishing? Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 54(3), 373–388. https://doi.org/10.1177/09610006211016533Objective – To examine the current state of knowledge among academic librarians in Spanish-speaking countries in Latin America regarding open access and predatory publishing. Furthermore, the study sought to explore actions or potential plans among this group that could allow them to better assist researchers with these aspects of scholarly publishing literacy. Design – An online survey, followed by interviews with self-selected participants. Setting – Academic libraries in Spanish-speaking countries in Latin America. Subjects – 104 librarians in the online survey and seven librarians in the interviews, each holding a position in an academic library in Spanish-speaking Latin America. Methods – An anonymous survey in Spanish consisting of 34 required questions was built with SurveyMonkey and distributed to participants between 30 July 2020 and 20 September 2020. Survey respondents were directed to contact the author via email if they wished to participate in follow-up interviews. Interviews were then conducted in Spanish over Zoom between 10 October 2020 and 10 November 2020, and the transcripts were coded and analyzed with NVivo. Main Results – Of the survey’s respondents, 31.73% indicated that their library has a scholarly communication librarian, 29.81% noted that the library receives requests for assistance with finding journals in which to publish at least once per week, and 16.35% reported this type of request at least 1-2 times per month. In specific regard to predatory publishing, almost 52.88% of respondents indicated that they never receive questions on this topic, and 25.00% answered that users seek this kind of information less than once per month. Additionally, 31.73% responded that information on predatory publishing is not available at their library, and 42.31% rated their own knowledge of predatory publishing as fair to very poor. Finally, 44.23% reported plans to develop training or information to educate their institution’s research communities about predatory publishing, and 2.88% planned to recruit a scholarly communications specialist. In interviews, all participants agreed that exchanging information with other institutions with more knowledge and services related to predatory publishing would be beneficial. Three interviewees saw a general role for the library in providing information on predatory publishing, and three others indicated that this should be a leadership role when working in conjunction with other departments. All participants saw a lack of knowledge about predatory publishing as one of the primary difficulties for academic libraries, and three reported that the survey itself had led them to recognize the importance of the library’s role in scholarly communication literacy and create plans for their library to assist researchers in regard to predatory publishing. Conclusion – Academic libraries in Spanish-speaking countries in Latin America are not yet offering robust support for researchers concerning predatory publishing, but there is growing recognition of the issue, as well as interest in further developing expertise among librarians. Collaboration and exchanges of information with other institutions with more developed resources related to predatory publishing is viewed positively and may build upon existing knowledge of open access publishing.

Is peer review duration shorter for attractive manuscripts?

Authors often ask how long the peer review process takes. Peer review duration has attracted much attention in academia in recent years. Existing research focuses primarily on the statistical characteristics of peer review duration, with few studies considering the potential influence of manuscripts’ attractiveness. This study aims to fill this research gap by employing attention economy theory. By analysing the peer review history of articles published in The British Medical Journal and 16 information and library science journals, we find a significant negative relationship between peer review duration and the Altmetric Attention Score. Overall, our study offers a new perspective on peer review behaviour and bridges the divide between peer reviews and altmetrics.

A nine-year (2012-2020) study of publication delay in an open access Library and Information Science journal

This study attempts to map the publication delay of articles published in an international, peer-reviewed, open access Library and Information Science journal (LIS) i.e. the DESIDOC Journal of Library and Information Technology (DJLIT). An exploratory method was applied to collect data related to the editorial timeline through archival open access to the articles published in DJLIT during the period from 2012 to 2020. Data were tabulated in an Excel spreadsheet to facilitate statistical analysis and interpretation. The study finds a mean and median waiting time of approximately 176 days and 152 days respectively for articles before they got published. About 64.57 percent of articles went through revision. The majority of articles (i.e., 40.08%) experienced a delay between 100-199 days and were closely followed by 26.11 percent of articles with a delay of up to 99 days. Only 2.43 percent of articles fell in the 400-499 days delay category before being published. A strong influence of time between submission to final revision on overall publication delay was observed. The study did not find any correlation between the number of contributing authors and increasing delay in publication and contradicts the result obtained in another study on selected information science journals. The study is expected to help researchers and authors in the field of LIS to take informed decision before submitting their manuscripts to DJLIT for publication.

A Multiple Linear Regression Analysis to Measure the Journal Contribution to the Social Attention of Research

This paper proposes a three-year average of social attention as a more reliable measure of the social impact of journals since the social attention of research can vary widely among scientific articles, even within the same journal. The proposed measure is used to evaluate a journal’s contribution to social attention in comparison to other bibliometric indicators. This study uses Dimensions as a data source and examines research articles from 76 disciplinary libraries and information science journals through multiple linear regression analysis. This study identifies socially influential journals whose contribution to social attention is twice that of scholarly impact, as measured by citations. In addition, this study finds that the number of authors and open access have a moderate effect on social attention, while the journal impact factor has a negative effect and funding has a small effect.

Analysing the relationship between altmetric attention score (AAS) and citation: a correlational study

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to assess the value of altmetrics or other indicators, showcasing the impact of academic output, which is seen too often correlated with the citation count.Design/methodology/approachThis study considered three reputed journals of Library and Information Science (LIS) published by Elsevier. A total of 1,164 articles were found in these journals from 2016 to 2020 and the relationships between altmetric attention scores (AAS) and citations were examined. The analysis was extended to compare the grouped data set based on percentile ranks of AAS like top 50%, top 25%, top 10% and top 1%.FindingsUsing Spearman correlation analysis, the findings reveal a positive correlation between AAS and citations with different significant levels for all articles, and articles with AAS, as well as for normalized AAS in the top 50%, top 25%, top 10% and top 1% data set. For the three journals International Journal of Information Management (IJIM), Journal of Informetrics (JIF) and Library and Information Science Research (LISR), a significant positive correlation is observed across all data sets. But an unexpected result was observed: in the case of the top 50% of articles for the IJIM and JIF showed no significant correlation but the LISR journal showed a positive correlation for the whole data set. This journal though has fewer articles in comparison to the other two.Research limitations/implicationsA source item that is highly cited may not be having high social media attention as reflected in the findings. This demarcates AAS with citations implying various factors on which these measurements are dependent. The study distinguishes these metrics lucidly. There is not a single guideline or uniformity in assessing the correlation found. But the problem is that the interpretation of the correlation strength affects the conclusion of the study. Moreover, this study will be a role model as a draft for librarians to select relevant journals for their libraries and will facilitate authors in the choice of the publication outlets for their papers, particularly concerning the journals that have both visibility and research impact.Originality/valueThe study reported devising a comprehensive tool to validate AAS as a measure of scholarly impact to include appropriate social media sources and verify its relationship with other metrics. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is the first attempt to discover the correlation between AAS and citations for the highly impactful LIS journal published by Elsevier. The empirical evidence lies in the citation and altmetric data extracted from the dimension database.

정보학 학술지 JISTaP 연구자들의 공개동료심사 인식에 관한 연구

학술지 출판 과정인 동료심사 과정에서 발생하는 문제점을 해결하기 위한 대안으로 공개동료심사(Open Peer Review, OPR)가 등장하였다. 본 논문은 최근 학술지 출판에서 시도되고 있는 OPR에 대한 연구자의 인식을 조사하고 영향 요인을 분석하였다. 정보학 분야 오픈액세스(OA) 국제학술지인 JISTaP의 저자, 심사자, 편집자를 대상으로 선정하고, 설문조사를 실시하였다. 응답자 90명의 설문결과에 대해 통계학 분석도구인 SPSS를 활용하여 기술통계분석, 신뢰성분석, 요인분석 및 회귀분석을 수행하였다. 설문 참여자들의 특성을 분석한 결과, 연령, 연구경력, 출판 논문 수, OPR 참여경험 등에서 고른 분포를 보이고 있었다. 연구자들의 OPR에 대한 인식 중 OPR의 공개 유형에 관한 인식을 조사한 후, 요인분석을 실시하여 OPR 적용에 영향을 미치는 두 개의 요인(OPR심사결과보고서, OPR심사자)을 추출하였다. 추출된 두 요인의 OPR 적용에 대한 예측력을 파악하고자 회귀분석을 실시한 결과, 21%의 설명력을 보이는 회귀식을 도출하였다. 본 논문의 연구결과는 향후 OPR 적용 및 발전을 위한 기초자료로 활용될 수 있을 것이다.

Titles and keywords: ‘Great love isn’t two people finding the perfect match in one another!’

Compared with abstracts, titles and keywords are briefer, more condensed, but fragmented textual elements on the first page of research articles (RAs) that summarise their content and represent their themes to enhance the discoverability. Therefore, the hidden, subtle relationship between titles and associated keywords increasingly attracts scholars’ attention. This research attempts to analyse title lengths and lexical words of two major title types: nominal titles and colonic titles, and investigate the matching coefficient (MC) values between lexical words and keywords assigned by authors. A total number of 505 RA titles from 15 journals in Library and Information Science were examined. Regarding title length and lexical words, the results found statistically significant differences between colonic and nominal titles. However, the results did not support the hypothesis that colonic titles have a higher MC value with author-assigned keywords than nominal titles. In light of significant findings, this research recommends constructing titles that maximise informativity and build effective keywords.

The association between Mendeley early readership and later citations in library and information science journals

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.

Scientific integrity in Information Science journals: content analysis of the guidelines for submission of articles

Resumo Investigar as diretrizes relacionadas à integridade científica nos periódicos de Ciência da Informação brasileiros. Para tanto, foi realizada uma análise de conteúdo das diretrizes para submissão de artigos em todas as revistas digitais brasileiras cadastradas na base de dados UlrichsWeb. A análise levantou dados relacionados a política de integridade científica, softwares de similaridade científica e critérios de análise da originalidade científica. Os resultados mostraram que 68% dos periódicos elaboraram diretrizes relacionadas ao tema, 44% indicam utilizar software de similaridade de conteúdo, mas apenas 12% descrevem que fazem indicação sobre percentual aceito de similaridade, e 20% realizam análise humana crítica dos relatórios de similaridade, sendo que 40% dos periódicos são signatários da Committee on Publication Ethics. Conclui-se a necessidade de formulação de políticas científicas, pelos periódicos da Ciência da Informação, que ressaltem a necessidade de ações voltadas à conscientização de boas práticas na pesquisa científica.

Mapping open science research using a keyword bibliographic coupling analysis network

The open science movement has grown rapidly since the mid-2010s, and research has been conducted in various disciplines such as public health, medicine, education, and computer science. Research results have mainly been published in the journals of information science, computer science, and multidisciplinary fields. To identify the intellectual structure of open science, we constructed a keyword bibliographic coupling analysis network. We examined a total of 1,000 articles on open science from the Web of Science, extracting and analysing 4,645 keywords. Then, we implemented and visualised the keyword bibliographic coupling network by constructing a keyword dataset and a reference dataset for each keyword. By analysing the backbone keywords and clusters in the network, the study revealed that the most prominent keywords were “open access,” “open data,” and “reproducibility.” The analysis also uncovered nine clusters in open science research: open access, reproducibility, data sharing, preregistrations and registered reports, research data, open peer review, tools and platforms for reproducible research, open innovation, science policy, and preprints. These results indicated that open science research focuses on transparency and reproducibility. Additionally, it is noteworthy that this study revealed a considerable focus on the open innovation and science policy areas, which have not received much attention in previous studies. The findings can help to understand the landscape of open science research and may guide research funding institutes and research policymakers to design their policies to improve the open science scholarly environment.