IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jamist/v55y2004i13p1155-1168.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impact and relevance of LIS journals: A scientometric analysis of international and German‐language LIS journals—Citation analysis versus reader survey

Author

Listed:
  • Christian Schloegl
  • Wolfgang G. Stock

Abstract

The goal of the scientometric analysis presented in this article was to investigate international and regional (i.e., German‐language) periodicals in the field of library and information science (LIS). This was done by means of a citation analysis and a reader survey. For the citation analysis, impact factor, citing half‐life, number of references per article, and the rate of self‐references of a periodical were used as indicators. In addition, the leading LIS periodicals were mapped. For the 40 international periodicals, data were collected from ISI's Social Sciences Citation Index Journal Citation Reports (JCR); the citations of the 10 German‐language journals were counted manually (overall 1,494 source articles with 10,520 citations). Altogether, the empirical base of the citation analysis consisted of nearly 90,000 citations in 6,203 source articles that were published between 1997 and 2000. The expert survey investigated reading frequency, applicability of the journals to the job of the reader, publication frequency, and publication preference both for all respondents and for different groups among them (practitioners vs. scientists, librarians vs. documentalists vs. LIS scholars, public sector vs. information industry vs. other private company employees). The study was conducted in spring 2002. A total of 257 questionnaires were returned by information specialists from Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. Having both citation and readership data, we performed a comparative analysis of these two data sets. This enabled us to identify answers to questions like: Does reading behavior correlate with the journal impact factor? Do readers prefer journals with a short or a long half‐life, or with a low or a high number of references? Is there any difference in this matter among librarians, documentalists, and LIS scholars?

Suggested Citation

  • Christian Schloegl & Wolfgang G. Stock, 2004. "Impact and relevance of LIS journals: A scientometric analysis of international and German‐language LIS journals—Citation analysis versus reader survey," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 55(13), pages 1155-1168, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jamist:v:55:y:2004:i:13:p:1155-1168
    DOI: 10.1002/asi.20070
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20070
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/asi.20070?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Esther Vaquero-Álvarez & Antonio Cubero-Atienza & Pilar Ruiz-Martínez & Manuel Vaquero-Abellán & María Dolores Redel Mecías & Pilar Aparicio-Martínez, 2020. "Bibliometric Study of Technology and Occupational Health in Healthcare Sector: A Worldwide Trend to the Future," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-22, September.
    2. Gregorio González-Alcaide & Juan Carlos Valderrama-Zurián & Rafael Aleixandre-Benavent, 2012. "The Impact Factor in non-English-speaking countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(2), pages 297-311, August.
    3. Liao, Chien Hsiang & Yen, Hsiuju Rebecca, 2012. "Quantifying the degree of research collaboration: A comparative study of collaborative measures," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 27-33.
    4. Zahed Bigdeli & Morteza Kokabi & Gholam Reza Rajabi & Ali Gazni, 2013. "Patterns of authors’ information scattering: towards a causal explanation of information scattering from a scholarly information-seeking behavior perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(1), pages 103-131, July.
    5. Remigiusz Sapa, 2007. "International contribution to library and information science in Poland: A bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 71(3), pages 473-493, June.
    6. Nicholas V. Olijnyk, 2015. "An algorithmic historiography of the Ebola research specialty: mapping the science behind Ebola," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(1), pages 623-643, October.
    7. Ehsan Mohammadi & Mike Thelwall & Stefanie Haustein & Vincent Larivière, 2015. "Who reads research articles? An altmetrics analysis of Mendeley user categories," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(9), pages 1832-1846, September.
    8. M. R. Davarpanah & S. Aslekia, 2008. "A scientometric analysis of international LIS journals: Productivity and characteristics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 77(1), pages 21-39, October.
    9. Walters, William H., 2017. "Do subjective journal ratings represent whole journals or typical articles? Unweighted or weighted citation impact?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 730-744.
    10. Emanuel Kulczycki & Ewa A. Rozkosz, 2017. "Does an expert-based evaluation allow us to go beyond the Impact Factor? Experiences from building a ranking of national journals in Poland," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(1), pages 417-442, April.
    11. Stefanie Haustein & Isabella Peters & Judit Bar-Ilan & Jason Priem & Hadas Shema & Jens Terliesner, 2014. "Coverage and adoption of altmetrics sources in the bibliometric community," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(2), pages 1145-1163, November.
    12. A. Abrizah & A. N. Zainab & K. Kiran & R. G. Raj, 2013. "LIS journals scientific impact and subject categorization: a comparison between Web of Science and Scopus," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(2), pages 721-740, February.
    13. Ronald N. Kostoff, 2007. "The difference between highly and poorly cited medical articles in the journal Lancet," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 72(3), pages 513-520, September.
    14. Bar-Ilan, Judit, 2008. "Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century—A review," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-52.
    15. Serenko, Alexander & Dohan, Michael, 2011. "Comparing the expert survey and citation impact journal ranking methods: Example from the field of Artificial Intelligence," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 629-648.
    16. Haustein, Stefanie & Siebenlist, Tobias, 2011. "Applying social bookmarking data to evaluate journal usage," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 446-457.
    17. Lior Rokach, 2012. "Applying the Publication Power Approach to Artificial Intelligence Journals," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(6), pages 1270-1277, June.
    18. Bhaskar Mukherjee, 2009. "Scholarly research in LIS open access electronic journals: A bibliometric study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 80(1), pages 167-194, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jamist:v:55:y:2004:i:13:p:1155-1168. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.asis.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.