Library And Information Science Research Research Articles

Unveiling novelty evolution in the field of library and information science in China

Purpose This study aims to analyze the distribution of novelty among scholarly papers in the field of library and information science (LIS) in China. Specifically, this study explores the distribution of novelty of papers in various journals, research topics and different periods. It is possible to understand the characteristics of LIS research in China and what factors have influenced it. Design/methodology/approach This paper collects articles published in Chinese library science journals indexed by the Chinese Social Sciences Citation Index from 2000 to 2022. The BERTopic model is used based on abstracts of the papers and to obtain the topic of each paper. Based on the combination innovation theory of reference pairs cited by focal papers, novelty scores of all papers are calculated. Next, this paper analyzes the novelty of papers under different topics. Finally, this paper analyzes the differences in author collaboration patterns across various topics, aiming to explain how these differences relate to the novelty of papers from a collaborative perspective. Findings This study shows that archival research topics have lower novelty than papers on journal evaluation and patent technology in Chinese LIS. Research papers in this field are gradually becoming more novel over time. Papers on different topics and with varying degrees of novelty exhibit distinct author collaboration patterns, with low-novelty topics more frequently featuring solo authorship, while high-novelty topics tend to involve a higher percentage of inter-institutional collaboration. Originality/value This study investigates the novelty characteristics of research papers on different topics in the field of LIS in China. The authors’ contribution includes visualizing research hotspots and trends in the field and analyzing authors’ collaboration patterns at the level of research topics, thereby providing new perspectives on the factors affecting the novelty of these papers.

Application of theories in Library and Information Science research in Tanzania: A content analysis

Using a content analysis approach, this study assessed the application of theories in Library and Information Science (LIS) research in Tanzania. The study’s specific objectives encompassed the analysis of the utilization patterns of theories in LIS research conducted in Tanzania, the identification of predominant theories, the highlighting of specific areas within LIS research where theories have been extensively applied, and the assessment of the level of integration of theories into research. While Kalervo and Vakkari’s classification scheme of LIS research areas was used to identify specific research areas where theories have been applied most, seven categories of theory talk were utilized to evaluate the degree to which these theories have been incorporated into LIS research. The study’s findings reveal a growing inclination towards the use of theories among LIS researchers, albeit at a slow pace. The study has also shown that TAM and UTAUT theories are the most frequently utilized, with information-seeking research being the primary area incorporating theories among all identified research areas. The findings also suggest that while a significant portion of the analyzed articles fall under the major category of the Continuum of Theory Talk, implying substantial incorporation of theories, a small number of them encountered difficulties in effectively integrating theories. The study, therefore, suggests that LIS educators should also prioritize the theoretical aspect of research in their curriculum. This will help researchers improve their understanding of the subject matter, leading to more reliable and precise research.

Global Library and Information Science Research Patterns: A Twenty-Five-Year Reflection

This paper reports the findings of a desk review research on global changes in Library and Information Science (LIS) research. Specifically, the review examined articles published in a 25-year (1995-2020) span of LIS research trends using Google database. The variables in the examination were gender, citation patterns, institutional affiliation, and degree of collaboration. To collect data from 43 articles, the study applied a bibliometric method, with the resultant data subjected to content analysis. The study found that male authors published more on the theme of LIS research trends than their female counterparts. Moreover, the results indicate a positive and significant correlation between the duration of a publication and the number of citations. The number of years of publication and open access publishing had a positive but non-statistically significant relationship with citation. Furthermore, the study found authorship collaboration to be moderate at 0.581. There was also a marked shift from traditional to new LIS research areas related to digital technology and its application in libraries. Overall, the trends in LIS research appear attributable to research infrastructure, sufficient funding, access to data, and the researcher’s skills. These findings support enhancing capacity building for LIS researchers to update their skills as part of concerted efforts to enable them to meet global changing needs.

Measuring the growth and impact of library and information science research in India: a multidimensional scientometric assessment

Purpose This study aims to provide insight into Library and Information Science (LIS) research in India using scientometric approaches. Web of Science (WoS) and SCOPUS databases were used for data retrieval. The study examines productivity in terms of source types, gender distribution, document formats, authorship and other factors. In addition, this study sought to identify trends or patterns in the research preferences of LIS scientists through text analysis. Design/methodology/approach Data were downloaded from the WoS and Scopus databases over 22 years and analysed using VOSviewer, Orange, Biblioshiny and CRExplorer softwares. Findings The findings reveal that 5,692 out of the 9,384 documents in both databases underwent the final examination. In total, 466 different sources produced all of those papers. Author analysis revealed that 6,603 different authors authored 5,692 documents. There were 4,209 male and 1,063 female authors. Furthermore, India shares maximum collaborations with the USA and England. The spectrogram features nine significant peaks corresponding to Lotka’s, Bradford’s and similar laws. Text analysis revealed that Indian LIS researchers have consistently investigated open access and digital or open libraries. Research limitations/implications The findings of this study will provide readers with a better understanding of India’s contribution to LIS. In addition, the study will help academics identify research gaps and undiscovered areas in the Indian context that require further investigation. Originality/value Not many studies highlight Indian research trends and international collaboration in LIS. This study highlights research trends, collaboration and gender productivity in LIS. The most cited references and trending topics were also identified using reference publication year spectroscopy and text analysis techniques.

Advocating for a more active role for the user in LIS participatory research: a scoping literature review

PurposeThrough a review of the literature, this article seeks to outline and understand the evolution and extent of user–participant involvement in the existing library and information science (LIS) research to identify gaps and existing research approaches that might inform further methodological development in participant-oriented and design-based LIS research.Design/methodology/approachA scoping literature review of LIS research, from the 1960s onward, was conducted, assessing the themes and trends in understanding the user/participant within the LIS field. It traces LIS research from its early focus on information and relevancy to the “user turn”, to the rise of participatory research, especially design-based, as well as the recent inclusion of Indigenous and decolonial methodologies.FindingsThe literature review indicates that despite the reported “user turn”, LIS research often does not include the user as an active and equal participant within research projects.Originality/valueThe findings from this review support the development of alternative design research methodologies in LIS that fully include and involve research participants as full partners – from planning through dissemination of results – and suggests avenues for continuing the development of such design-based research. To that end, it lays the foundations for the introduction of a novel methodology, Action Partnership Research Design (APRD).

Investigation of Library Job Demands and Requirements through the Lens of Job Market

This article investigated job demands and requirements in the American Library Association (ALA) job website. The states with the highest number of library and information science (LIS) job openings were California, Texas, Illinois, New York, and Washington. Academic libraries had the highest number of job openings, followed by Public libraries and Government libraries, respectively. The most sought-after LIS job categories were Administration/Management, Special Collections/Archives, Subject Specialist/Liaison, Information Literacy and Instruction, and Collection Development/Acquisitions. A significant majority of library-related jobs required a Master’s degree. These findings benefit LIS researchers, educators, professionals, and job seekers.

Theoretical Backbone of Library and Information Science: A Quest

This study primarily aims to identify unique theories and specific uses of theories in the library and information science (LIS) domain. It provides a comprehensive list of the theories used in LIS journal articles indexed by Scopus (an abstract and citation database) from 1970–2021. It expands on the most common theories and highlights the areas and purposes for which used theories in the LIS domain. Our goal is to demonstrate the usages and applications of various borrowed theories from complementary disciplines in the LIS domain. A systematical methodology is applied, following a few open-source AI-based software packages (such as ASReview, and OpenRefine), to analyse the theories against different parameters, keeping in mind the drawbacks of the previous studies. The study's findings show that the LIS domain's theoretical foundations are understudied. Researchers mainly borrowed theories from social sciences such as sociology, psychology, and management studies to solidify their domain. The paper provides a clear road map for the theoretical development of LIS research. And the resulting outputs may help policymakers, academicians, and researchers, irrespective of disciplines in general and information science in particular, understand the foundations and theoretical and methodological trends of theories that may lead to a better understanding of the theories before their selection and applications.

“How Do You Measure a Relationship?” Assessment and Evaluation Challenges of Knowledge Exchange Activities in Information Work

ABSTRACTToday there is increasing emphasis on knowledge exchange (KE), the movement of knowledge and expertise amongst diverse groups to enhance research uptake, use, and impact in healthcare, government, and community settings. Library and information science (LIS) professionals are central actors in KE though community engagement, scholarly communication, literacy, and cultural heritage initiatives, but (how) is this work formally documented and evaluated? Through interviews with 24 information professionals working in varied settings, we considered how KE activities fit into the current library assessment and evaluation landscape. Using thematic analysis, we identified challenges with placing this work within current assessment practices and evaluation frameworks and showing its value, as well as a desire for alternative, more dynamic assessment and evaluation methods. We discuss these findings with respect to previous research in LIS and KE more broadly to consider professional and organizational implications.

Bridging the Gap Between Designers and Users

In this paper, we describe our approach to bridging the designer-user gap by engaging 20 older adults in codesign workshops to generatively re-imagine health-related voice agent (VA) design for voice user interfaces (VUI) for older adults, by older adults. Drawing on recent research in Library and Information Science (LIS), we describe codesign as a method, as well as how the 20 older adults perceived codesign in our two case studies of health-related VA design for health learning and exercise. Older adult codesigners perceived codesign as transformative, enjoyable, educational, and useful. We also share specific experiential recommendations of strategies for conducting codesign, including strategies for transitioning from expert to facilitator, creating experience-based questions, probing for deeper design ideation and priorities, and ways of approaching codesign through humility and care. We describe the codesign method’s generative benefits in our two case studies and encourage LIS researchers to consider including codesign methods in their research.

Gender difference in library and information science research

The study aims to ascertain the gender differences in the research productivity, research impact, collaboration pattern, funding, and self-citations of male and female authors belonging to the field of Library and Information Science (LIS). The top twenty-four (24) journals belonging to the LIS field ranked as per impact factors in Journal Citation Report (JCR) offered by Clarivate Analytics were analyzed. Only those journals that provided author biographies at the end of each article were selected. To ascertain the information regarding the gender of an author, biographical sketches provided at the end of each article were examined. Google Scholar was consulted to collect data on citations. For self-citations, references of each paper were thoroughly checked, and self-citation, if found, were tabulated for analysis. Collaboration pattern in terms of gender preference was studied under national and international categories. If collaborating authors belonged to the same country, the collaboration pattern was deemed national, and if the collaborating authors belonged to different countries, the pattern was deemed international. The acknowledgment section of each article was thoroughly checked to collect information on funding characteristics. Countries of origin belonging to authors were ascertained and were classified into three regions i.e. European, Non-European and Cross-Cultural. Then the relationship between the region and author productivity under various authorship patterns was studied. Later, Descriptive Statistics, ANOVA, T-test, and Chi-Square tests were applied to ascertain the significance of the results. Males and females on average are almost equally productive in the field of LIS. Males receive more citations for their manuscripts, creating more research impact than their female counterparts. It is further found that males and females prefer to collaborate with authors of the same gender. Moreover, males are more active and visible on the international collaboration side, while females are more active on the national side of collaboration. Regarding the research papers reporting on funding, it is found that the female gender has more likelihood of receiving funds for their research. Further, it is found that male authors are more involved in self-citations than females. Moreover, it is also revealed that female researchers are more research productive in Non-European countries while in European and Cross-Cultural regions men are still dominant in terms of research productivity. The study considers 24 prominent journals in the LIS. Since the journals are novel in the field, these provide a clearer view of the existence or absence of gender bias in the field. Only 24 prominent journals belonging to the LIS are considered, and the scope is limited to 5 years only. If more journals are considered and the study’s period is expanded, the results may vary from the present study’s findings. The study will let the stakeholders know whether there exists any gender disparity in LIS research. As the study focuses on the different areas and facets of research, it will enable professionals to identify the areas of gender bias and work toward resolving the issue. Further, the study will provide a bird’s eye view of the LIS field from the perspective of gender bias.

Research Trends in Library and Information Science in South Africa and Nigeria: A Content Analysis

Abstract A review of the research trends in library and information science (LIS) is important as it provides insight into the research practices of scholars in the field. This study investigated the research trends in master’s and doctoral research outputs relating to LIS produced in Nigeria and South Africa between 2009 and 2015 to identify the most researched subject areas and the most neglected subject areas in LIS research in the two countries. A total of 400 master’s and doctoral research outputs produced in Nigeria and South Africa were analysed by means of a qualitative content analysis, and 15 research areas were created by means of modified subject categorisation adopted from the extant literature. The findings were that the most researched subject area in both countries was human information behavior in respect of both master’s and doctoral research outputs. The least researched areas in LIS research outputs in Nigeria were archives and records management, LIS history and developments, bibliometrics, scientometrics and informatics, knowledge and information resource management. In South Africa, bibliometrics, scientometrics and informatics were the least researched areas in respect of doctoral research outputs, and LIS education and pedagogy were the least researched areas in master’s research outputs. The positivist research paradigm was more prevalent. The implication of the findings is that LIS schools in Nigeria and South Africa need to focus more on research areas that deal with current trends and challenges confronting the profession. In today’s world of work, most services are driven by information technology and research should be directed towards addressing the implementation of recent trends in the profession. Since the sample framework used for Nigeria was low, it may not be appropriate to generalise this finding to other institutions.

Characteristics of LIS research articles affecting their citation impact

The paper analyzes the citation impact of Library and Information Science (LIS) research articles published in 31 leading international LIS journals in 2015. The main research question is: to what degree do authors’ disciplinary composition in association with topic, methodology, and type of contribution affect their citation impact? The impact is analyzed in terms of the number of citations received and their authority, using outlier normalization and subfield normalization. Quantitative content analysis is used to analyze article characteristics including topic, methodology, type of contribution, and the disciplinary composition of their author teams. The citations received by the articles are traced from 2015 to May 2021. Citing document authority is measured by the citations they had received up to May 2021. The overall finding was that authors’ disciplinary composition is significantly associated with citation scores. The differences in citation scores between disciplinary compositions appeared typically within information retrieval and scientific communication. In both topics LIS and computer science jointly received significantly higher citation scores than many disciplines like LIS alone or humanities in information retrieval; or natural sciences, medicine, or social sciences alone in scientific communication. The paper is original in reporting a joint analysis of content characteristics, authorship composition, and impact.

The use of one-on-one interviews in library and information science: A scoping review

Individual interviews are not commonly used in library and information science (LIS). A content analysis of research papers published between 2015 and 2020 in seven journals yielded 323 articles applying interviews. Selected papers, extracted from the Scopus database, were examined qualitatively and quantitatively to find the description of the type of interview, the use of additional research methods, the number of interviewees and the topics of the studies. Interviews appeared in 11% of the research papers, confirming previous studies. They are often combined with other methods, in particular surveys and observations. Half of the interviews were conducted with up to 15 participants. Individual interviews were used most frequently in studies of information behaviour (19% of the papers), librarians, information retrieval and web search. This study contributes to better understanding interviews as a LIS research method and may facilitate the planning of research projects.

The association of disciplinary background with the evolution of topics and methods in Library and Information Science research 1995–2015

AbstractThe paper reports a longitudinal analysis of the topical and methodological development of Library and Information Science (LIS). Its focus is on the effects of researchers' disciplines on these developments. The study extends an earlier cross‐sectional study (Vakkari et al., Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2022a, 73, 1706–1722) by a coordinated dataset representing a content analysis of articles published in 31 scholarly LIS journals in 1995, 2005, and 2015. It is novel in its coverage of authors' disciplines, topical and methodological aspects in a coordinated dataset spanning two decades thus allowing trend analysis. The findings include a shrinking trend in the share of LIS from 67 to 36% while Computer Science, and Business and Economics increase their share from 9 and 6% to 21 and 16%, respectively. The earlier cross‐sectional study (Vakkari et al., Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2022a, 73, 1706–1722) for the year 2015 identified three topical clusters of LIS research, focusing on topical subfields, methodologies, and contributing disciplines. Correspondence analysis confirms their existence already in 1995 and traces their development through the decades. The contributing disciplines infuse their concepts, research questions, and approaches to LIS and may also subsume vital parts of LIS in their own structures of knowledge production.

Library and information science and the positivist paradigm: Some critical reflections

The employment of the positivist paradigm in Library and Information Science (LIS) research is commonplace, by at least those who have cared to declare their research paradigms, especially at masters and doctoral levels of their studies. Inspired by such widespread use of positivism in LIS, this paper interrogates the applicability and appropriateness of this paradigm as a philosophical bearing for LIS researchers. Although the thrust of the paper is to critique the applicability of positivism to LIS research, it is itself not a lampoon on the scientific nature of LIS, neither is it in the interest of the paper to challenge any researchers who have employed positivism in the conduct of their research in the area of LIS. Instead, it is a critical reflection on some of the glaring challenges of employing positivism in LIS research, and warns against falling into the trap of what the author calls “positivist paradigmatic sophistry.” The paper is not prescriptive or conclusive, but opens new opportunities for critically reflecting on the utility of positivism in LIS research, and a more careful use of this paradigm by LIS scholars and researchers. The discussion unfolds by first putting LIS into perspective by way of briefly tracing the development of the sciences through the lens of Comte. It proceeds by way of explaining the nature of LIS in order to put it into perspective and goes on to unpack the concept of a paradigm before zeroing in on positivism as a paradigm of research. The paper finally presents some challenges that are associated with the application of positivism to LIS research. It argues that positivism is largely incompatible with LIS as a social science and concludes by imploring LIS researchers to engage in a deliberative and progressive discourse on whether positivism is appropriate for LIS research.

Research trends in LIS: The case of doctoral research in Pakistan, 1981–2021

The current study aims to examine doctoral research works produced by Pakistani universities in the field of library and information science (LIS). The study provides an understanding of the perspective of PhD level research in Pakistan and aims to determine developmental patterns, popular focused areas, current trends, and the most productive universities. The content analysis method was used to conduct this study. A self-structured questionnaire was used for the collection of data. A total of five universities were selected for the collection of softcopies of theses for this study. The information was gathered from department heads at five LIS schools in Pakistan. MS-Excel was used to analyze and present the data in the form of tables and charts to achieve the study’s objectives. The findings show that Pakistani LIS schools have produced a total of 62 PhD theses from 1981 to 2021. Steady development has been observed until 2010. However, the growth of LIS research has increased significantly during the last decade. The study has explored LIS research trends at the doctoral level and presents an agenda for future research to inspire potential LIS scholars. The findings are useful to improve research quality at the doctoral level for LIS scholars and faculty members of LIS schools in Pakistan and other developing countries.

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.

Rhetorical structure parallels research topic in LIS articles: a temporal bibliometrics examination

PurposeThe effectiveness of rhetorical structure is essential to communicate key messages in research articles (RAs). The interdisciplinary nature of library and information science (LIS) has led to unclear patterns and practice of using rhetorical structures. Understanding how RAs are constructed in LIS to facilitate effective scholarly communication is important. Numerous studies investigated the rhetorical structure of RAs in a range of disciplines, but LIS articles have not been well studied.Design/methodology/approachIn this study, the authors encoded rhetorical structures to 2,216 articles in the Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology covering a period from 2001 to 2018 with the approaches of co-word analysis and visualization. The results show that the predominant rhetorical structures used by LIS researchers follow the sequence of Introduction-Literature Review-Methodology-Result-Discussion-Conclusion (ILMRDC).FindingsThe authors' temporal examination reveals the shifts of evolutionary pattern of rhetorical structure in 2008 and 2014. More importantly, the authors' study demonstrates that rhetorical structures have varied greatly across research areas in LIS community. For example, scholarly communication and scientometrics studies tend to exclude literature review in articles.Originality/valueThe present paper offers a first systematic examination of how rhetorical structures are used in a representative sample of a LIS journal, especially from a temporal perspective.

On thresholds: signs, symbols and significance

PurposeThis paper reviews research developments in semiosis (sign activity) as theorized by Peirce, Eco and Sebeok, focusing specifically on the current study of “semiotic threshold zones,” which range from the origins of life through various nonhuman life forms to artificial life forms, including those symbolic thresholds most familiar to library and information science (LIS) researchers. The intent is to illustrate potential opportunities for LIS research beyond its present boundaries.Design/methodology/approachThe paper provides a framework that describes six semiotic threshold zones (presemiotic, protosemiotic, phytosemiotic, zoosemiotic, symbolic and polysemiotic) and notable work being done by researchers in each.FindingsWhile semiotic researchers are still defining the continuum of semiotic thresholds, this focus on thresholds can provide a unifying framework for significance as human and nonhuman interpretations of a wide variety of signs accompanied by a better understanding of their relationships becomes more urgent in a rapidly changing global environment.Originality/valueThough a variety of semiotic-related topics have appeared in the LIS literature, semiotic thresholds and their potential relationships to LIS research have not been previously discussed there. LIS has traditionally tasked itself with the recording, dissemination and preservation of knowledge, and in a world that faces unprecedented environmental and global challenges for all species, the importance of these thresholds may well be considered as part of our professional obligations in potentially documenting and archiving the critical differences in semiosis that extend beyond purely human knowledge.

‘Out of Sight, But Not Out of Mind’: A Collaborative Reflective Case Study on Including Participants with Invisible Disabilities in LIS Research

ABSTRACT The aim of this research project was to explore the inclusion of people with invisible disabilities (PwIDs) as library and information science (LIS) research participants. At least 30 percent of Australians with a disability will have an invisible disability, such as autism, mental health, brain injuries, intellectual or learning disabilities, sensory disabilities, and neurodiversity. Yet despite constituting a distinct part of the population, the voices of people with invisible disabilities are often missing in LIS research. We critically reflected on our experiences as practitioner-researchers by individually and collaboratively documenting and evaluating our approaches to research and the context in which we engaged with PwIDs as participants in our studies. We conclude that creating a research environment that welcomes the participation of PwIDs starts before the study begins and continues throughout the research process. Our recommendations for other LIS researchers is to create welcoming and inclusive research environments as an integral part of study design; this includes being aware that participants may have invisible disabilities which may, or may not, be disclosed. Based on our critical reflection and a review of the literature, we suggest ways that researchers can better create a welcoming environment for PwIDs.