Content Analysis of Papers Submitted to Communications in Information Literacy, 2007-2013

Abstract

The author conducted a content analysis of papers submitted to the journal, Communications in Information Literacy, from the years 2007-2013. The purpose was to investigate and report on the overall quality characteristics of a statistically significant sample of papers submitted to a single-topic, open access, library and information science (LIS) journal. Characteristics of manuscript submissions, authorship, reviewer evaluations, and editorial decisions were illuminated to provide context; particular emphasis was given to the analysis of major criticisms found in reviewer evaluations of rejected papers. Overall results were compared to previously published research. The findings suggest a trend in favor of collaborative authorship, and a possible trend toward a more practice-based literature. The findings also suggest a possible deterioration in some of the skills that are required of LIS authors relative to the preparation of scholarly papers. The author discusses potential implications for authors and the disciplinary literature, recommends directions for future research, and where possible, provides recommendations for the benefit of the greater community of LIS scholars. [SPECIAL FEATURE]Hollister: Content Analysis of

Global information literacy: a content analysis of three journals

“…The emergence of the USA as the country contributing the most articles to the information literacy journals in this study is consistent with other content analysis studies (Aharony, 2010; Bhardwaj, 2017; Hollister, 2014; Kolle, 2017; Nazim and Ahmad, 2007; Majid et al , 2015). That the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia are in the top five published countries is also consistent with previous studies (Aharony, 2010; Bhardwaj, 2017; Hollister, 2014; Kolle, 2017; Nazim and Ahmad, 2007; Majid et al , 2015). Our findings accentuate the degree to which Western, English-speaking, and, frequently, North American perspectives on information literacy are disseminated by information literacy journals.…”

“…Our finding that the journal published out of the USA ( CIL ) was the least global of the journals analyzed echoes others’ findings. As Hollister (2014) found, although 19 countries were represented in the submissions to CIL, only seven countries were represented in published articles (p. 59). Language may be a significant obstacle to diversifying the information literacy literature.…”

“…Content analysis studies have also focused on identifying which countries are publishing within the field of information literacy. The USA is consistently identified as the country with the most articles published within the field (Aharony, 2010; Bhardwaj, 2017; Hollister, 2014; Kolle, 2017; Nazim and Ahmad, 2007; Majid et al , 2015). Australia, Canada and the UK are also frequently found in the top five countries (Aharony, 2010; Bhardwaj, 2017; Hollister, 2014; Kolle, 2017; Nazim and Ahmad, 2007; Majid et al , 2015).…”

“…The USA is consistently identified as the country with the most articles published within the field (Aharony, 2010; Bhardwaj, 2017; Hollister, 2014; Kolle, 2017; Nazim and Ahmad, 2007; Majid et al , 2015). Australia, Canada and the UK are also frequently found in the top five countries (Aharony, 2010; Bhardwaj, 2017; Hollister, 2014; Kolle, 2017; Nazim and Ahmad, 2007; Majid et al , 2015). Notably, the top countries producing information literacy research publish in English (Majid et al , 2015; Hollister, 2014).…”

“…Australia, Canada and the UK are also frequently found in the top five countries (Aharony, 2010; Bhardwaj, 2017; Hollister, 2014; Kolle, 2017; Nazim and Ahmad, 2007; Majid et al , 2015). Notably, the top countries producing information literacy research publish in English (Majid et al , 2015; Hollister, 2014). Other countries occasionally found in the top five include Spain (Kolle, 2017), China (Majid et al , 2015), South Africa (Aharony, 2010) and Germany (Nazim and Ahmad, 2007).…”