Investing Wisely: Citation Rankings as a Measure of Quality in Library and Information Science Journals

Via, Barbara J.; Schmidle, Deborah Joseph

doi:10.1353/pla.2007.0038

Cited by 20 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Acknowledgments have also received attention, with studies noting an increase in the frequency of LIS articles containing acknowledgments to colleagues, trusted assessors, technicians, and funding agencies (Cronin, ; Cronin & Shaw, ; Harter & Hooten, ; Zhao, ). As with producer studies, numerous artifact studies have made use of LIS journals, but more by way of illustrating a new method or application (e.g., Via & Schmidle, ; Waltman et al., ; Kim, ) than discussing the evolution of the field.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

A bibliometric chronicling of library and information science's first hundred years

Larivière

Sugimoto

Cronin

2012

Acta Anaesthesiol Scand

137

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a condensed history of Library andInformation Science (LIS) over the course of more than a century using a variety of bibliometric measures. It examines in detail the variable rate of knowledge production in the field, shifts in subject coverage, the dominance of particular publication genres at different times, prevailing modes of production, interactions with other disciplines, and, more generally, observes how the field has evolved. It shows that, despite a striking growth in the number of journals, papers, and contributing authors, a decrease was observed in the field's marketshare of all social science and humanities research. Collaborative authorship is now the norm, a pattern seen across the social sciences. The idea of boundary crossing was also examined: in 2010, nearly 60% of authors who published in LIS also published in another discipline. This high degree of permeability in LIS was also demonstrated through reference and citation practices: LIS scholars now cite and receive citations from other fields more than from LIS itself. Two major structural shifts are revealed in the data: in 1960, LIS changed from a professional field focused on librarianship to an academic field focused on information and use; and in 1990, LIS began to receive a growing number of citations from outside the field, notably from Computer Science and Management, and saw a dramatic increase in the number of authors contributing to the literature of the field.2 For simplicity's sake, we use the terms field and discipline interchangeably in the text, while cognizant of the fact that much more has been, and could be, said on the relative appropriateness of each term vis-à-vis LIS.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

A bibliometric chronicling of library and information science's first hundred years

Larivière

Sugimoto

Cronin

2012

Acta Anaesthesiol Scand

137

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the context of academic libraries, several times, citations are used to support this task. 40,41 However, our results reveal this measure is inappropriate for the context of clinical practice.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 74%

“…In other words, the CRII can be used by information professionals to guide the dissemination and the acquisition of information for clinical and health services. In the context of academic libraries, several times, citations are used to support this task . However, our results reveal this measure is inappropriate for the context of clinical practice.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

The Clinical Relevance of Information Index (CRII): assessing the relevance of health information to the clinical practice

Galvão

Ricarte

Grad

et al. 2013

Health Info Libraries J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The high volume of health information creates a need for processes and tools to select, evaluate and disseminate relevant information to health professionals in clinical practice. Objectives: To introduce an index of the clinical relevance of information and to show that it is different from existing measures. Methods: A conceptual model of knowledge translation was developed to explain the need for a new index, whose application was verified by an exploratory study with two (quantitative and qualitative) phases. The Clinical Relevance of Information Index (CRII) was defined employing descriptive statistical analyses of assessments performed by health professionals. The model and the CRII were applied in a primary healthcare context. Results: The CRII was applied to 4574 relevance assessments of 194 evidence synopses. The assessments were performed by 41 family physicians in 2008. The CRII value of each synopsis was compared with the number of citations received by its corresponding research paper and with the level of evidence of the study, presenting weak correlation with both. Conclusion: The CRII captures aspects of information not considered by other indices. It can be a parameter for information providers, institutions, editors, as well as health and information professionals targeting knowledge translation.

show abstract

“…This is indeed surprising, because we would expect, at least, the number of negative citations to be higher after retraction. Conversely, the fact it only occurred in a very small fraction of papers seems to suggest that post-retraction citations occurred indiscriminately well beyond the function of the so-called “ceremonial citations” ( Via and Schmidle 2007 ). As Smith argued in commenting this very case, considerations related to impact factor may have encouraged researchers to do so ( Smith 2006 ).…”

Section: Normative Commitment and The Role Of Ethicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a phronetic space for responsible research (and innovation)

Bardone

Lind

2016

Life Sci Soc Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The term Responsible Research and Innovation has recently gained currency, as it has been designated to be a key-term in the European research framework Horizon 2020. At the level of European research policy, Responsible Research and Innovation can be viewed as an attempt to reach a broader vision of research and innovation as a public good. The current academic debate may be fairly enriched by considering the role that phronesis may have for RRI. Specifically, in this paper we argue that the current debate might be fruitfully enriched by making a categorial shift. Such a categorial shift involves moving away from the temptation to interpret responsible research and innovation in a technocratic way towards a more pluralistic vision that is rooted in the idea of phronesis. In the present context phronesis points the attention to the cultivation and nurturement of the researcher’s formation as a type of engagement with the actual practice of researching, a practice in which researchers (and other parties concerned) are called to apply judgment and exercise discretion in specific and often unique situations without the re-assuring viewpoint of the technician.

show abstract

Investing Wisely: Citation Rankings as a Measure of Quality in Library and Information Science Journals

Cited by 20 publications

References 10 publications

A bibliometric chronicling of library and information science's first hundred years

A bibliometric chronicling of library and information science's first hundred years

The Clinical Relevance of Information Index (CRII): assessing the relevance of health information to the clinical practice

Towards a phronetic space for responsible research (and innovation)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About