Library And Information Science Scholars Research Articles

Publication Output and Trends of LIS Faculty Teaching Health-Related Courses: Connecting Research, Teaching, and Practice

The publication output of Library and Information Science (LIS) faculty teaching health courses has not been analyzed. The purpose of this bibliometric analysis was to examine publication patterns of full-time LIS faculty that teach health-related courses for library science programs in the United States and Canada. Full-time LIS faculty teaching health-related courses in American Library Association (ALA)–accredited programs were identified by searching course listings, faculty profiles, and syllabi from ALA-accredited school websites and contacting deans and directors of schools. The 29 LIS faculty that were identified and met the inclusion criteria were contacted via email in September 2021 and invited to voluntarily share their curricula vitae (CVs) for analysis. A total of 16 respondents provided their CVs, representing a 55% response rate. This was supplemented by locating five more CVs publicly available online. The final sample of LIS faculty was 21, and the bibliometrics analysis was based on a total of 716 publications published from 2011 to 2021 and reported on the CVs from this group of scholars. This analysis resulted in the identification of several patterns. Journal articles were the most common publication type, followed by conference proceedings. Joint authorship patterns were more common than solo authors, highlighting the collaborative nature of research. While faculty published in a range of LIS and interdisciplinary journals, highly cited papers appeared in health specialty journals. This study represents the first step in examining the research output for this under-explored community of LIS scholars. These findings may be of interest to promotion and tenure committees, newer tenure-track faculty, and doctoral students exploring academic careers in this specialized area.

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.

Usage frequency and application variety of research methods in library and information science: Continuous investigation from 1991 to 2021

The present study analyzed over 26,000 research articles published between 1991 and 2021 in twenty-one major LIS (Library and Information Science) journals, using the machine learning (ML) approach to categorize the research methods used by LIS scholars. The findings of this study are significant. Firstly, there has been a shift in the research strategy from conceptual research (e.g., "Theoretical approach") to empirical research (e.g., "Interview") in LIS investigations over the past 31 years. Secondly, the research topics explored by LIS scholars during this period have moved from system-centered issues (e.g., "Information retrieval/models and algorithms") to user-centered topics (e.g., "Information services "). Thirdly, the study revealed dynamic and revealing relationships between the 18 research topics identified in the study and the 16 research methods commonly adopted in the LIS field. These dynamic relationships can be visualized by year and longitudinally via an interactive map created in this study.

The health information behaviors of people who inject drugs: a scoping review of the literature

PurposeThe United States of America is in the midst of an opioid crisis. However, little has been written within the domain of LIS (Library and Information Science) about the health information needs and behaviors of people who inject drugs. The purpose of this project is to conduct a scoping review of the current knowledge disseminated by LIS scholars and professionals regarding what information people who inject drugs have access to, need, how they interact with information and what dissemination methods may be most beneficial.Design/methodology/approachA scoping review of the literature was conducted with the additional inclusion criteria that the information needs be expressed from the insider perspective of this population instead of from the researcher.FindingsIn searching over a dozen databases, only seven articles were found that reflected the information behaviors of people who use drugs from the perspective of themselves. Only one article was from information science, two were from health informatics and one was from health communication, a closely linked field. These findings describe the information behaviors and needs of this population and speak to the need for more comprehensive research in this area in order to create targeted health information resources for this sensitive population.Originality/valueThere is little research in the domain of information science that has been conducted into the health information-seeking behaviors of people who inject drugs. Most of the work in this area is from the perspective of the researcher, not the person who injects drugs. This exploration into the literature on the information behavior of people that inject drugs from the perspective of themselves is unique.Key messages There is very little research that has been conducted into the health information-seeking behaviors of people who inject drugs.Most of the work in this area is from the perspective of the researcher, not the person who injects drugs.Only four such articles were found in the domain of LIS and seven, in total, between all academic domains.

Issues and Perspectives of Public Libraries in Pakistan: A Review

Abstract Public libraries (PLs) aim to meet the information needs of their local communities and play a vital role in the development of a nation. Comprehensive published literature is available on PLs in Pakistan and could explore the challenges encountered by these PLs in the country through literature review. Thus, to fill this gap in existing literature, a review of literature was conducted to explore the status, issues, and perspectives of the PLs in Pakistan since its partition in 1947. The researchers reviewed library and information science (LIS) literature published on the subject topics. Various electronic data sources were searched such as Taylor and Francis, Emerald Insight, EBSCOhost, Science Direct, Web of Science (WoS), Scopus, Library and Information Science Abstracts (LISA), Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts (LISTA), and Google Scholar. Similarly, the profiles of prominent Pakistani LIS scholars were also consulted for the said purpose. A search string was formulated to get precise results with some limitations on extracting required data. Peer-reviewed studies published from 1947 to 2021 in the English language were included in present study, which extracted 74 citations. After deleting duplicates from titles and abstracts, a full-text assessment was done. Finally, 27 studies were included, which matched the search criteria and explored various issues of the PLs in Pakistan. The findings of this study reveal that PLs in Pakistan are facing several challenges such as nonexistence of appropriate planning, absence of library legislation, lack of ICT application in libraries, absence of policy regarding public relations and publicity (PRP) of library resources and services. Other issues are lack of proper service structure for LIS professionals, as a deficiency in providing proper LIS continuing education and training opportunities to LIS professionals, insufficient human resources, the bureaucratic administrative structure of public libraries, shortage of sufficient funds and financial independence. The highlighted issues and challenges may serve as a guide for public library policy and decision-makers in reforming their present policies, or in articulating a modern public library system in Pakistan. This study suggests several recommendations which would help the competent authorities and policymakers to transform the PLs in Pakistan from neglected to indispensable community learning and information resource centers. This is a first study of its kind in Pakistan, and it is hoped that the findings will serve as a springboard for future research in the LIS field and contribute to the literature on the PLs in Pakistan.

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.

Largest contribution to LIS by external disciplines as measured by the characteristics of research articles

The paper analyses Library and Information Science (LIS) articles published in leading international LIS journals based on their authors’ disciplinary backgrounds. The study combines content analysis of articles with authors’ affiliation analysis. The main research question is: Are authors’ disciplinary backgrounds associated with choice of research topics and methods in LIS articles? The study employs a quantitative content analysis of articles published in 30 + scholarly LIS journals in 2015, focusing on research topics and methods. The articles are also assigned to three disciplinary categories based on authors’ affiliations: External (no authors from LIS institutions), Internal (all authors from LIS institutions), and Mixed (some authors from LIS institutions, some from outside). The association of articles’ disciplinary categories with article research topics and methods is analysed quantitatively. Most research contributions to LIS come from external articles (57%). However, LIS scholars have a clear majority in research on L&I services and institutions (68%), while external scholars dominate the contributions in Information retrieval (73%) and Scientific communication (Scientometrics, 69%). Internal articles tend to have an intermediary’s (29%) or end-user’s (22%) viewpoint on information dissemination while the external ones have developer’s viewpoint (27%) or no dissemination viewpoint (49%). Among research strategies, survey (29%) and concept analysis (23%) dominate internal articles, survey (28%) and citation analysis (19%) dominate mixed articles, and survey (20%) and citation analysis (19%) dominate external articles. The application profiles of research strategies varied somewhat between disciplinary categories and main topics. Consequently, the development of LIS in the areas of Information retrieval, Information seeking, and Scientific communication seems highly dependent on the contribution of other disciplines. As a small discipline, LIS may have difficulties in responding to the challenges of other disciplines interested in research questions in these three areas.

Conducting and Publishing Research in Developing Countries: Challenges and Solutions

AbstractMost of the knowledge in the library and information science (LIS) discipline is created and published by researchers in developed countries. Two roundtable sessions of ASIS&T SIG‐III with the ASIS&T Africa Chapter and ASIS&T South Asia Chapter, in early 2021, confirmed “the lack of a conducive research environment” as the primary reason for this inequality in the discipline and called for systematic efforts, like this panel, to (a) create awareness about this inequality and (b) start building a global support system for LIS researchers in developing countries. In the first 30 minutes of this panel, six LIS scholars with cultural roots, academic training, and research experience in developing countries will illustrate common challenges to conducting and publishing research in developing countries. In the next 30 minutes, attendees will be divided into groups, with each group facilitated by a panelist, to brainstorm solutions for addressing the challenges related to academic training for conducting and publishing research, accessing resources, institutional support, opportunities for research collaboration and funding, fieldwork, analyzing data, composing manuscripts, and finding mentors, among others. In the last 30 minutes, each group will present its findings.

Not Quite ‘Ask a Librarian’: AI on the Nature, Value, and Future of LIS

AbstractAI language models trained on Web data generate prose that reflects human knowledge and public sentiments, but can also contain novel insights and predictions. We asked the world's best language model, GPT‐3, fifteen difficult questions about the nature, value, and future of library and information science (LIS), topics that receive perennial attention from LIS scholars. We present highlights from its 45 different responses, which range from platitudes and caricatures to interesting perspectives and worrisome visions of the future, thus providing an LIS‐tailored demonstration of the current performance of AI language models. We also reflect on the viability of using AI to forecast or generate research ideas in this way today. Finally, we have shared the full response log online for readers to consider and evaluate for themselves.

Wikipedia: an unexplored resource for understanding consumer health information behaviour in library and information science scholarship

PurposeTo date, health information behaviour (HIB) models have not been applied to an exploration of Wikipedia as a consumer health information resource. Wikipedia has been situated and is well established as a valuable resource for the general layperson wishing to learn more about their health or the health of a loved one. This paper aims to identify an approach to exploring the role of Wikipedia in consumer health information behaviour (CHIB) that is grounded in a conceptual framework from the library and information science (LIS) discipline.Design/methodology/approachThe author draws on current HIB models and relevant theories from existing LIS literature and applies them to propose a new definition of CHIB. The author uses this definition to frame Wikipedia as an unexplored consumer health information resource in the LIS scholarship and suggests future directions for placing such investigations within a conceptual framework from LIS.FindingsThe paper finds that Longo's expanded conceptual model of health information-seeking behaviour (ECMHISB) could be valuable and useful for the exploration of CHIB in relation to Wikipedia's health and medical content. Due to Wikipedia's online nature, research framed by these models must acknowledge and take under consideration the digital divide phenomenon and various factors that influence an individual's place within it.Research limitations/implicationsThis work builds a foundation upon which future research into the role of Wikipedia's health and medical content in CHIB can be grounded. Using Longo's model, future research might provide insight into who Wikipedia is helping and who it has left behind. LIS scholars, practicing health librarians and perhaps health workers stand to gain a deeper understanding of the potential influence of Wikipedia's health information on its consumers.Originality/valueFor LIS scholars, this paper is novel in the fact that a HIB model has not yet been applied to the study of Wikipedia's health content. This paper provides a foundation for this research.

The public sphere and Habermas: reflections on the current state of theory in public library research

PurposeThis article addresses a recent debate in this journal between Buschman and Widdersheim and Koizumi on public libraries and public sphere theory in library and information science (LIS). The article moves beyond the debate as the debate has been too focused on the theories of Jürgen Habermas. In order to really understand the democratic mission of public libraries and how it is related to the public sphere, the author argues that LIS scholars need to look beyond Habermas' theories of the public sphere.Design/methodology/approachThis is a theoretical article that discusses different theories of the public sphere, and how they have been and can be applied in library and information science.FindingsThe author finds that a main disagreement between Buschman and Widdersheim and Koizumi is whether one can use the concept of a public sphere without doing it in a “traditional” Habermasian way. The answers put forward in this article, is that we can and should look beyond Habermas' work when seeking to understand the role of public libraries as public spheres.Originality/valueThe article puts forward theories that are not commonly used in LIS, and advocates for broadening the theoretical scope of LIS scholars studying the relations between public libraries and public spheres.

Partnership among Librarians: Reflection on Observations, Interviews and Research Reports from Three Universities in Nigeria and Zimbabwe

Partnership is not a new phenomenon in the university environment. It embraces strategies used by people with common interest to harvest knowledge in terms of sharing or collaboration. However, the case differs with collaborations in Library and Information Science (LIS) research in Africa, especially LIS scholars in African universities in Nigeria and Zimbabwe. Paucity of empirical literature is available on research collaboration among LIS scholars in Nigerian and Zimbabwean universities. The purpose of the study was to examine partnership among librarians, with reflection on observation and interview research reports in three universities in Nigeria and Zimbabwe. The study adopted a qualitative approach using interview to gather data from librarians drawn from three Nigerian and Zimbabwean universities. The qualitative research approach grounded on content analysis of documents/literature, observation and interview method was use for the study. The observation focus on the authors’ exposition in the sampled universities environment, while the interview were key informants from each of the three countries universities sampled. The study consider the collaborative theory through grounded method. The findings of the study revealed lack of trust in the individual or groups collaborator; team members have the feeling that the project they are collaborating on is of little benefit, due to poor relationship. Team members see themselves as contender or challenger; which has affected leadership issue and involvement of long meetings and inability to address the truth. In terms of the influence of collaboration on professional growth of librarians, result demonstrated enhancement of teaching aspect of librarianship, learning and research quality; promote cooperation, coordination, which in turn increased level of intensity, tenacity and interaction among members. Linkage among LIS professional ranges from networking, cooperation, alliances, coordination and partnership, coalition and eventually collaboration. Challenges reported include catastrophic consequent on negative effect of work, culture and stylistic parameters including concept, attitude and professional hindrances. dominance impact of policies and procedures of collaboration, exploitation of the weak members, lack of clarity and rationale behind the collaboration, unwillingness to change by members in collaboration, lack of socialisation, largeness of the group, wrong membership and jettisoning of members ideas which eventually make some members take the decision of quitting the team. The study recommends inter-disciplinary, intra-institutional and inter-institutional collaboration among various stakeholders in LIS education and training.

The coronavirus pandemic, libraries and information: a thematic analysis of initial international responses to COVID-19

PurposeThis study aims to present and discuss the international library and information community’s initial responses to the coronavirus pandemic. It chronicles official statements from various library and information associations as they were released in real-time, thereby providing a contemporary and historical snapshot of the early stages of this global health crisis. The aim is to both historically and thematically contextualize these initial responses to help establish a foundation upon which to anchor, build, extend and analyze approaches to the pandemic as it unfolded (and indeed as it continues to unfold at the time of this writing in June 2020).Design/methodology/approachDrawing upon a qualitative documentary analysis of statements on COVID-19 released by various international library and information associations, this study provides a thematic analysis of these contemporary policies. Specifically, this thematic analysis was carried out to identify and illuminate major themes appearing within the statements. Further, a comparative thematic analysis was then undertaken to compare the themes across all statements to discover and determine convergences or divergences in content and coverage.FindingsThe formal statements released by these organizations feature and share many similar themes in their initial responses to COVID-19, including support for/solidarity with libraries; information provision; maintaining services; digital migration of services; workplace arrangements/concerns; contextual contingencies of libraries (diversity of kinds, circumstances and challenges); health concerns and proper/good hygiene; countering dis/misinformation; external collaborations with public health agencies; and partnerships with industry including publishers.Research limitations/implicationsAlthough this study’s purview is admittedly limited in size and scope – involving six, albeit major, library and information associations from mainly English speaking countries – it can be used as a foundation for further studies into how libraries and information centres in other English and non-English speaking countries responded to the coronavirus pandemic.Practical implicationsThis study can help inform current, alternative, contingency or other future library responses geared towards or tailored for the coronavirus or other health-related crises. It can also be used as a baseline to track the trajectory of library responses and actions as they unfolded throughout the COVID-19 crisis.Social implicationsBy providing the start of an account and analysis of the international library and information science (LIS) community’s initial responses, this study also contributes to the broader (ongoing) conversation about the coronavirus pandemic and intervenes in emerging historical examinations of this crisis. This study could be of interest to LIS scholars and practitioners, in addition to public health researchers, public policymakers, cultural studies academics and historians, interested in how different and intersectional efforts – in this case, the international LIS community – contributed and can contribute to this pandemic and other similar or parallel crises.Originality/valueThe international library and information community’s initial responses to this global health crisis are contextualized, thereby serving as a foundation upon which to anchor, build and extend other research on responses to the pandemic as it unfolded. Drawing upon a qualitative documentary analysis of these statements, this study presents and discusses the international library community’s initial responses to the coronavirus pandemic. It chronicles these statements as they were released in real-time, thereby providing a contemporary and historical snapshot of the early stages of this crisis. The aim is to both historically and thematically contextualize the international library and information community’s initial responses to help establish a foundation upon which to anchor, build, extend and update the international library community’s responses to the pandemic as it unfolded (and indeed as it continues to unfold at the time of this writing in June 2020). This foundation, it is hoped, will help illuminate their respective positions, circumstances, convergences, divergences and areas of possible (future) cooperation, coordination and collaboration.

Twenty-six years of LIS research focus and hot spots, 1990–2016: A co-word analysis

The purpose of this research is to map and analyse the conceptual and thematic structure of library and information science (LIS) research from the perspective of the co-word analysis. The bibliographical records consist of all the research papers published in the LIS core journals between 1990 and 2016 and indexed in Web of Science. ‘CiteSpace’ was used to visualise the co-word network of LIS studies. The frequency of co-occurrence and centrality scores in the overall structure of the field showed that the word ‘Science’ is the most significant and pivotal keyword among the nodes in the co-word network of LIS literature, and in this respect, the word ‘Library’ is in the second place. However, the results of the social network analysis uncovered that in spite of the high frequency of the word ‘library’, the pivotal role of the term has been exposed to decline over the time. The results of the analysis of co-word clusters showed that ‘information seeking and retrieval’ is the most important research focus in the intellectual structure of LIS literature during 1990–2016. Also, analysis of the hot spots of the LIS research based on Kleinberg algorithm indicated that the words ‘Internet’ and ‘World Wide Web’ have attracted the most attention by LIS scholars during the years under study.

Historical development of definitions of information literacy: A literature review of selected resources

This article traces the historical progression of Information Literacy (IL) definitions from 2000 to 2015 in the published literature on first-year seminar and freshman general education IL instruction in the U.S. This period roughly corresponds to the influence of the ACRL's Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education (Standards) on the work of LIS professionals and scholars in IL and information literacy instruction (ILI), prior to the adoption in January 2016 of the Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education (Framework). Following a brief look at the background of IL in Library and Information Science (LIS), the chronological development of IL definitions is examined using the three major categories of IL definitions based on Addison and Meyers' (2013) framework of IL definitions, and concludes with a discussion of limitations of Addison and Meyers' (2013) framework of IL definitions. The information presented here offers one perspective of viewing the development and history of IL in U.S. higher education.

Conceptualizing information work for health contexts in Library and Information Science

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to suggest that a closer consideration of the notion of work and, more specifically, information work as a sensitizing concept in Library and Information Science (LIS) can offer a helpful way to differently consider how people interact and engage with information and can complement a parallel focus on practices, behaviours and activities.Design/methodology/approachStarting with the advent of the concept of information work in Corbin and Strauss’ work, the paper then summarizes how information work has evolved and taken shape in LIS research and discourse, both within and outside of health-related information contexts.FindingsThe paper argues that information work affords a lens that can acknowledge the multiple levels of effort and multiple processes (cognitive, physical or social-behavioural) related to information activities. This paper outlines six affordances that the use of information work within LIS scholarship imparts: acknowledges the conceptual, mental and affective; brings attention to the invisibility of particular information activities and their constituents; opens up and distinguishes the many different lines of work; destabilizes hierarchies between professionals and non-professionals; emphasizes goals relating to information activities and their underlying pursuits; and questions work/non-work dichotomies established in existing LIS models.Originality/valueThis paper is a first in bringing together the many iterations of information work research in LIS. In doing so, this paper serves as a prompt for other LIS scholars to take up, challenge the existing borders of, and thus advance the concept of information work.

Google Scholar Citation metrics of Pakistani LIS scholars: an overview

Purpose The purpose of this study is to analyze the use of Google Scholar Citations’ profiling platform by library and information science (LIS) scholars in Pakistan. Design/methodology/approach Purposive sampling was used to collect Google Scholar Citations profiles between 15 November 2017 and 31 January 2018. Resultant data were analyzed in SPSS Version 21. Findings In terms of demographical data, the study results were consistent with previous studies of Pakistani LIS scholars. There were strong correlations between Google Scholar Citations metrics (publications, citations, h-index and i10-index). The results indicate that, compared with a 2011 survey of LIS academics in Pakistan, the overall uptake for this cohort remains relatively low. This cohort is not maximizing the opportunity provided by this specific online profiling system to increase research visibility. Research limitations/implications As the study was limited to those Pakistani LIS scholars who already had a profile on ResearchGate, it would be useful to broaden the research to encompass all Pakistani LIS scholars. Practical implications The role of the librarian as an adviser in scholarly communication and impact can be extended to support scholars in the adoption of new online platforms for scholarly communication and visibility. Originality/value There have been no published research studies on Google Scholar Citations metrics in the context of Pakistani LIS scholars as a whole.

Much Library and Information Science Research on Open Access is Available in Open Access, But There Is Still Room to Grow

A Review of:
 Chilimo, W. L., & Onyancha, O. B. (2018). How open is open access research in library and information science? South African Journal of Libraries & Information Science, 84(1), 11-19. https://doi.org/10.7553/84-1-1710
 Abstract 
 Objective – To investigate the open access (OA) availability of Library and Information Science (LIS) research on the topic of OA, the relative openness of the journals in which this research is published, and the degree to which the OA policies of LIS journals facilitate free access.
 Design – Bibliometric, quantitative dataset analysis.
 Setting – African academic library and information science department.
 Subjects – 1,185 English-language, peer-reviewed articles published between 2003 and 2013 on OA and published in journals indexed by three major LIS databases, of which 909 articles in the top 56 journals received further analysis.
 Methods – Authors first searched LIS indexes to compile a dataset of published articles focusing on OA. They then manually identified and evaluated the OA policies of the top 56 journals in which these articles were found. The openness of these journals was scored according to a rubric modified from the Scholarly Publishing and Academic resources Coalition’s (SPARC’s) 2013 OA spectrum. Finally, authors manually searched Google Scholar to determine the OA availability of the articles from the dataset.
 Main Results – Of the 909 articles published in the top 56 journals, 602 were available in some form of OA. Of these, 431 were available as gold copies and 171 were available as green copies. Of the 56 journals evaluated for openness, 13 were considered OA, 3 delayed OA, 27 hybrid/unconditional post-print, 2 hybrid/conditional post-print, and 11 had unrecognized OA policies.
 Conclusion – The increasing amount and significance of LIS research on OA has not directly translated to the comprehensive adoption of OA publishing. Although a majority of the articles in the dataset were available in OA, the authors indicate that some measures of OA adoption and growth assessed in this study are only somewhat higher than in other disciplines. The authors call upon LIS professionals to become more conversant with journals’ OA policies. An acknowledgement that not all LIS scholars researching OA are necessarily advocates thereof led the authors of this study to recommend further investigation of OA research not available in OA to shed light on those scholars’ perceptions and preferences.

Exploring knowledge patterns of library and information science journals within the field: a citation analysis from 2009 to 2016

A substantial number of studies have examined the journal quality and ranked them using academic survey, scientometric indicator, or citation analysis. This study aims to investigate library and information science (LIS) journal impact from a different perspective: the knowledge contribution to peer journals in the LIS field. The data are selected from the SSCI and SCI databases by Thomson Reuters from 2009 to 2016. Based on the criterion that the journal has at least 6 years of citation data, a total of 26 LIS-related journals were selected for this study. These journals are divided into four quadrants according to their knowledge impact on peer journals. This study not only uses social network analysis to investigate the citation patterns among the journals and rank the journals based on different structural characteristics in the network but also examines the formation of subfields through clustering analysis. The findings suggest research avenues for LIS scholars and journal editors, such as identifying research subgroups and formulating strategies for LIS journal development.