TOP LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SCIENCE LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SCIENCE JOURNALS ... Authorship studies in library and information science have been conducted using different ... and Theory

  • Published on
    18-Mar-2018

  • View
    219

  • Download
    7

Embed Size (px)

Transcript

  • Asia-Pacific Conference on Library & Information Education & Practice, 2006

    555

    AUTHORSHIP FROM THE ASIA AND PACIFIC REGION IN TOP LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SCIENCE JOURNALS

    TAEMIN KIM PARK Technical Services Department, Indiana University Libraries

    Bloomington, Indiana 47405, U.S.A E-mail: park@indiana.edu

    Abstract. Authorship characteristics from the Asian and Pacific region in the top 20 journals in library and information science category by ISI (Institute for Scientific Information) Journal Citation Reports impact factor are studied. Major findings of this study are: there are total of 1,273 articles for the period of 1967 to 2005; the most productive countries were, in rank order, Australia, China, South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Japan, New Zealand, Malaysia, Thailand and Philippines. 78% of authors in the top 20 library and information science journals contributed a single article. Regional collaboration was strongly linked between Australia and China; China and Singapore; and Australia and New Zealand. Out of the region, United States authors collaboratively contributed 15.7% of the total contribution. Most contributed individual authors and affiliated institutes are reported as well.

    Introduction While numerous authorship patterns, in library and information science journals have been studied and reported, studies regarding the Asia and Pacific region as a whole have not been addressed. This research provides a profile of Asian authorship and its characteristics in leading 20 LIS journals. The top 20 journals by ISI (Institute for Scientific Information) Journal Citation Reports impact factors in the Information and Library Science category are used to study authorship in the Asia and Pacific region. The following questions are addressed: which countries are most productive; the number of items published by authors in the region; who are the most productive authors; the extent of collaborative authorship in terms of the number of articles written by more than one author; the extent of collaboration among countries within the region; which are the most productive affiliated institutes; and comparison between library science and information science journals. Literature Review Authorship studies in library and information science have been conducted using different sources: a single journal, a group of journals, or databases. Olsgaard and Olsgaards study (1980) provides a working model for authorship research. They studied the gender, occupation, and geographic location of the authors of articles in College & Research Libraries, Library Journal, Library Quarterly, Library Trends, and RQ from 1968 through 1977.

    Selected studies are reviewed which report authors characteristics and collaborative authorships reflected in an individual LIS journal or a group of journals. Cline (1982) studied the authorship characteristics in College & Research Libraries, 1939 through 1979. Her research included the number of articles, gender, coauthors, institutional affiliations, number of pages, number of references, subject matter, language, publisher name, journal title, form of documents, among other things. Metz (1989) reported authorship profiles for the period 1980 to 1988 for the same journal in order to update some of Clines analysis regarding referencing characteristics, gender, affiliated institutes, and collaborative authorship. Terry (1996) reported updated data for the Cline and Metzs authorship study in College & Research Libraries regarding gender, institutional affiliation, and collaboration for the period 1989-1994. Herubel (1990) added internationality in an authorship study using the journals International Library Review and Libri. The institutional affiliation, production by countries, and origin of cited journals were studied. Studying the authorship characteristics in Library and Acquisitions: Practices and Theory (LAPT), 1977-1995, Nisonger (1996) reported a detailed analysis of authorship data and comparative data with previous studies regarding total numbers, collaborative authorship, author productivity, occupational/institutional affiliation, geographical distribution and international authorship. Several studies used a group of journals or databases in analyzing authorship characteristics. Buttlar (1991) studied author characteristics regarding gender, occupation, affiliated institutes and geographic location in 16 basic library science journals from 1987 to 1989.

  • Asia-Pacific Conference on Library & Information Education & Practice, 2006

    556

    Another aspect of LIS authorship studies reports the ranking of the most productive authors. Budd (2000) used the Social Science Citation Index, 1993-1998 and reported the most productive 19 authors in published papers in LIS journals; White (1990) listed 41 most productive authors in the Journal of the American Society for Information Science; Cline (1982) listed the six most highly contributing authors who have contributed more than 10 articles in the College & Research Libraries. Nisonger (1996) listed the most highly contributing 22 authors in LAPT.

    A few studies for regional and international collaboration are reviewed here. Using the Science Citation Index on CD-ROM, Gupta and Munshi (2004) investigated regional collaboration in science among South Asian countries through co-authored papers for the period 1992-1999. Among the five South Asian countries there were 194 co-authored papers. The total number of papers in each country were: 11,429 papers in India, 401 in Pakistan, 221 in Bangladesh, 118 in Sri Lanka and 65 in Nepal. India had the strongest collaboration with Bangladesh and had the most collaborative authorship with other countries. Arunachalam (2000) reported the international collaboration in science between India and China using the Science Citation Index 1998. The total number of papers published by some Asian countries were: 60,721 papers in Japan (2nd), 13,878 in China (11th ), 11,437 in India (14th). South Korea published 8,234 papers (15th). 30.7% of papers produced in China had international co-authors, while India showed 40.1% co-authored papers. Both China and Indias most frequent collaborators were the United States. For China, the second most frequent collaborator was Japan and for India, it was Germany. Using the Science Citation Index, 1994-1996, Korean international co-authorship in science was studied by Kim (1999) who reported that a total of 3,627 collaborative papers were published. Analyzing the institutional affiliation and collaborative countries, 84% of collaborative authors are affiliated with universities, 10% from government-supported institutes and 6% from industry. Korea has 25.7% of international co-authorship in science fields and has a strong collaboration with the United States, followed by Japan, Italy, Germany, the United Kingdom, and France. Paos (1992) study reported that scientific collaboration is shown to be associated with research funding and to serve as a means to advance research.

    Studies reporting on cited reference, subject, impact factor, methodologies used are beyond the scope of this literature review.

    Methodology and Data Collection This research is modeled on the classic authorship study by Olsgaard and Olsgaard (1980) and a more recent study by Nisonger (1996) for some of the research questions. The top 20 journals ranked by ISI (Institute for Scientific Information) Journal Citation Reports impact factors in the Information and Library Science category were used to study authorship in the Asia and Pacific region. The top 20 journals in 2004 were: Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, Information Systems Research, MIS Quarterly, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Information & Management, Journal of Documentation, Information Processing & Management, Journal of Management Information Systems, International Journal of Geographical Information Science, College & Research Libraries, Government Information Quarterly, Scientometrics, Journal of Academic Librarianship, Library Quarterly, Journal of the Medical Library Association, Journal of Information Science, Journal of Information Technology, Library and information Science Research, Information Research-An International Electronic Journal. The JCR impact factor has been used frequently as a useful tool in ranking individual journals and evaluating journal collections. Nisonger (2004) reported the benefit and weakness of using JCR impact factor in managing journal collections. The method normalizes for journal age and journal size and, although controversial, it is usually considered the most valid citation measure. ISI defines the journal impact factor as the average number of times articles from the journal published in the past two years have been cited in the JCR year. Impact factor is calculated by dividing the number of citations received in 2004 to articles published in 2003 and 2002 by the total number of articles published in 2003 and 2002. It is conceptualized as the number of times an average article has been cited.

    The Web of Science online database, a product of the ISIs Web of Knowledge, was used for collecting data. All products of the Web of Science, the Science Citation Index, the Social Sciences Citation Index, and the Arts and Humanities Citation Index were selected for a comprehensive search. A preliminary search was conducted in August and data for this study was collected in early December 2005. Selected countries in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) group were used for the study. Searches were conducted for each of 12 countries and each of 20 journal titles. Authorship in articles published in these 20 journals was analyzed for the following countries: Australia, China

  • Asia-Pacific Conference on Library & Information Education & Practice, 2006

    557

    (including Hong Kong), Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, Philippines, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam. China and Hong Kong were searched separately for a more thorough search, but contributions from China and Hong Kong were combined together as China for data analysis. Vietnam was also searched under Viet Nam. Journals with title changes were all searched throughout the life of each journal. Initially the time span 1955 to 2005 was searched. However, the search result was limited to the period 1967 to 2005 due to the fact that search limit by date feature was available only after 1967. Also the search was limited to articles only, without any language limitation. Conference reports, letters, editorials, and book reviews were not included because these are not scholarly or research articles. The search result was analyzed using ISIs analyzing tool to have the results ranked by country, author, institute name, journal title and publication year.

    The journal profile in Table 1 shows all the searched journal titles with dates. Among the 20 journals there are 6 library science journals and 14 journals in the information science field. The distinction between library-oriented and information science-oriented journals was based on the journal name itself. It appears that the name itself identifies the journals focus and main area of disciplines. The oldest journal, Bulletin of the American Medical Library Association, the former title of the Journal of the American Medical Library Association began in 1911. The newest journal, Information Research in the information science category began in 1995.

    Results and Comparison

    Country Productivity

    There are a total of 1,273 items in the top 20 journals for the period 1967 to 2005 which were contributed by authors from the region. The result shows that there are no contributions from authors in Indonesia and Vietnam. The most productive countries were, in rank order, Australia (334 articles), China (304), South Korea (144), Taiwan (135), Singapore (127), Japan (126), New Zealand (108), Malaysia (17), Thailand (16), and the Philippines (9).

    A total number of 119 articles was published in the library science journals while 1,154 articles were published in the information science journals. The 5 most productive countries in the library science journals were: Australia, New Zealand, China, Taiwan, and South Korea; while the 5 most productive countries in the information science category were: Australia, China, Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan.

    Table 2 shows the number of articles in the top 20 library and information science journals contributed by each country in the Asia and Pacific region. The total percentage may not round to 100% due to the shared percentages through collaboration with authors in the countries outside the region. Table 3 shows the productivity of countries in the library science journals. The country productivity in the information science journals is displayed in Table 4. Examining the total contributions, 19,315 articles were contributed to the top 20 journals: 6,727 for library science journals, and 12,588 for information science journals. Therefore, authors in the 10 Asian and Pacific countries made 6.6% of the contribution in the top 20 journals, while making 1.8% in the library science journal and 9.2% in the information science journals respectively. Australia is the most productive country among the 12 countries in both library and information science journals. Comparing countries in both categories, New Zealand and Taiwan are strong in library science journals; while South Korea and Singapore are strong in information science journals respectively. China is relatively strong both in library and information science, being the second in information science and the 3rd most productive country in the library science journals.

    Author Productivity

    The author productivity by number of articles contributed indicated that a relatively small number of authors made multiple contributions. Co-authored articles were counted equally in the author productivity count. Hence, the results include authors outside the Asia and Pacific region who were coauthored with authors in the region. For example, one author contributed 17 articles, another contributed 14 articles; while two contributed 12, three contributed 11 and two contributed 10 articles. Table 5 shows a detailed distribution of author contribution in the top 20 journals in library and information science. In other words, 78% of the authors contributed a single article, while 6% wrote four or more articles. A total of 1,273 articles in library and information science journals were contributed by 1,922 authors.

  • Asia-Pacific Conference on Library & Information Education & Practice, 2006

    558

    Table 1. Journal profile

    Journal name Journal category

    Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 1966- Information science Information Systems Researc...

Recommended

View more >