The Interdisciplinary Influence of Library and Information Science 1996–2004: A Journal-to-Journal Citation Analysis

Odell, Jere D.; Gabbard, Ralph

doi:10.5860/crl.69.6.546

Cited by 35 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Together, these criteria ensure that the journals included in the study meet both objective and subjective standards of impact and reputation. The last two criteria also address a common complaint—that the JCR Information Science & Library Science category includes some journals that are not central to the discipline of LIS (Abrizah, Zainab, Kiran, & Raj, ; Manzari, ; Ni, Sugimoto, & Cronin, ; Odell & Gabbard, ). Thirty‐one journals met all four criteria.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disciplinary, national, and departmental contributions to the literature of library and information science, 2007–2012

Walters

Wilder

2015

Asso for Info Science & Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We investigate the contributions of particular disciplines, countries, and academic departments to the literature of library and information science (LIS) using data for the articles published in 31 journals from 2007 to 2012. In particular, we examine the contributions of authors outside the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada; faculty in departments other than LIS; and practicing librarians. Worldwide, faculty in LIS departments account for 31% of the journal literature; librarians, 23%; computer science faculty, 10%; and management faculty, 10%. The top contributing nations are the United States, the United Kingdom, Spain, China, Canada, and Taiwan. Within the United States and the United Kingdom, the current productivity of LIS departments is correlated with past productivity and with other measures of reputation and performance. More generally, the distribution of contributions is highly skewed. In the United States, five departments account for 27% of the articles contributed by LIS faculty; in the United Kingdom, four departments account for nearly twothirds of the articles. This skewed distribution reinforces the possibility that high-status departments may gain a permanent advantage in the competition for students, faculty, journal space, and research funding. At the same time, concentrations of research-active faculty in particular departments may generate beneficial spillover effects.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disciplinary, national, and departmental contributions to the literature of library and information science, 2007–2012

Walters

Wilder

2015

Asso for Info Science & Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Journals and other artifacts are also used as proxies for disciplines in an effort to explore interdisciplinary connections. Import/export studies of LIS journal articles have identified five main disciplines with which the field is trading intellectually: Computer Science, Business/Management, Health/Medical Sciences, Engineering, and Communication (e.g., Erfanmanesh et al., ; Odell & Gabbard, ; Cronin & Meho, ; Huang & Chang, ; Chang & Huang, ). Analyses of theses have revealed similar disciplinary associations with Business/Management, Computer Science, Education, Communication/Journalism, and Psychology (Prebor, ; Sugimoto et al., ).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Larivière

Sugimoto

Cronin

2012

Acta Anaesthesiol Scand

136

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

“…Library and information science emerged as information science was incorporated into the field of library science and library science reacted to the impact of information technology. Therefore, some of the past research focusing on LIS interdisciplinarity selected journals in only library science or information science and found that (a) LIS researchers often cite publications across disciplines (Al‐Sabbagh, 1987; Bracken & Tucker, 1989; Buttlar, 1999; Chen & Liang, 2004; Cheng, 1995; Chikate & Patil, 2008; Chung, 1995; Gatten, 1991; LaBoire & Halperin, 1976; Pluzhenskaya, 2008; Shi, 2002; Tsay, 2008), (b) LIS publications are cited by researchers from various disciplines (Goodall, Julien, Lajoie‐Paquette, & McKechnie, 2005; Meyer & Spencer, 1996; Odell & Gabbard, 2008; Tang, 2004), and (c) that LIS researchers collaborate with researchers from different disciplines (Chen & Liang, 2004; Qiu, 1992). However, most studies have used only direct citation analysis and focused exclusively on the journals cited.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A study of the evolution of interdisciplinarity in library and information science: Using three bibliometric methods

Chang

Huang

2011

J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci.

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study uses three bibliometric methods: direct citation, bibliographic coupling, and co-authorship analysis, to investigate interdisciplinary changes in library and information science (LIS) from 1978 to 2007. The results reveal that LIS researchers most frequently cite publications in their own discipline. In addition, half of all co-authors of LIS articles are affiliated with LIS-related institutes. The results confirm that the degree of interdisciplinarity within LIS has increased, particularly coauthorship. However, the study found sources of direct citations in LIS articles are widely distributed across 30 disciplines, but co-authors of LIS articles are distributed across only 25 disciplines. The degree of interdisciplinarity was found ranging from 0.61 to 0.82 with citation to references in all articles being the highest and that of coauthorship being the lowest. Percentages of contribution attributable to LIS show a decreasing tendency based on the results of direct citation and co-authorship analysis, but an increasing tendency based on those of bibliographic coupling analysis. Such differences indicate each of the three bibliometric methods has its strength and provides insights respectively for viewing various aspects of interdisciplinarity, suggesting the use of no single bibliometric method can reveal all aspects of interdisciplinarity due to its multifaceted nature.

show abstract

The Interdisciplinary Influence of Library and Information Science 1996–2004: A Journal-to-Journal Citation Analysis

Cited by 35 publications

References 14 publications

Disciplinary, national, and departmental contributions to the literature of library and information science, 2007–2012

Disciplinary, national, and departmental contributions to the literature of library and information science, 2007–2012

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

A study of the evolution of interdisciplinarity in library and information science: Using three bibliometric methods

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About