In Search Of. . . Research Methods Used in Information Science

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paulette Bernhard ◽  
Louise Lambert
Keyword(s):  
Content Analysis ◽  
Research Methods ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Doctoral Thesis

This article provides, first, a review of indicators of "research articles" as found in five different kinds of studies (content analysis of core journals and of specific journals, review of doctoral thesis, analysis of secondary journals, analysis of other sources), and second, the identification of the research methods listed in those studies, as well as in eleven textbooks about research and research methods.

The Evolving Landscape of Research Methods in Library and Information Science

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-17
Author(s):  
Judith Mavodza
Keyword(s):  
Content Analysis ◽  
Research Methods ◽  
Quantitative Methods ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Research Strategy ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
Research Strategies ◽  
Qualitative Approaches ◽  
Research Questions

The library and information science (LIS) profession is influenced by multidisciplinary research strategies and techniques (research methods) that in themselves are also evolving. They represent established ways of approaching research questions (e.g., qualitative vs. quantitative methods). This chapter reviews the methods of research as expressed in literature, demonstrating how, where, and if they are inter-connected. Chu concludes that popularly used approaches include the theoretical approach, experiment, content analysis, bibliometrics, questionnaire, and interview. It appears that most empirical research articles in Chu's analysis employed a quantitative approach. Although the survey emerged as the most frequently used research strategy, there is evidence that the number and variety of research methods and methodologies have been increasing. There is also evidence that qualitative approaches are gaining increasing importance and have a role to play in LIS, while mixed methods have not yet gained enough recognition in LIS research.

scholarly journals LIS Periodicals Contain a Low Percentage of Articles that Qualify as Research

2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Hayman
Keyword(s):  
Content Analysis ◽  
Research Methods ◽  
Research Method ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Academic Library ◽  
The United States ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Fiscal Year ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
Research Article

A Review of: Turcios, M. E., Agarwal, N. K., & Watkins, L. (2014). How much of library and information science literature qualifies as research? Journal of Academic Librarianship, 40(5), 473-479. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2014.06.003 Objective – To determine how much of the literature in a library and information science (LIS) periodical collection qualifies as research. Design – Content analysis. Setting – The LIS periodicals collection of an academic library that supports an established LIS graduate program at a college in the United States of America. Subjects – Of the 177 identified periodicals with LIS content that fell within project scope from the local collection, researchers analyzed 101 journals that include academic/scholarly content and an additional 4 journals with relevant trade content. This study excluded open access (OA) journals. Methods – Using the most recent issue of each subject journal from the fiscal year 2012-2013, the authors performed a content analysis on all indexed content items, and then classified each content item as research or non-research. For content identified as research, researchers identified the research method (or methods) used. The data collection tool also captured identifying information and keywords for all content. Main Results – Within the journals meeting the scope of this study, researchers identified 1,880 articles from 105 individual journal issues. Only 16% (n=307) of articles met the authors’ established definition to qualify as research. Within the subset of research articles, the authors further identified 45% (n=139) that used a single research method. An additional 36% (n=112) of identified research articles used two research methods and 15% (n=46) used three methods, with the remainder using four or more methods. Surveys were the most frequently used research method, accounting for 49% (n=66) of the single method studies. The researchers discovered that surveys remained popular even in mixed-method studies, with 21% (n=117) of all identified research articles using surveys. This is closely followed by 20% (n=109) of studies reported as using the general category of “other” methods, for research that did not meet one of the predefined methods. The next two most popular identified methods were case studies at 13% (n=73), followed by content analyses at 13% (n=71). For the eight other research methods identified, none saw a frequency above 10%. Focus groups and usability studies tied for the least frequently used method among the 307 articles, both at 2% (n=9). The keyword analysis focused on two categories, one for research article keywords and another for non-research article keywords, for all 1,880 articles identified. Non-research articles had less reliance on keywords, with authors reporting keywords appearing on 73% (n=1156). Within these, authors discovered 120 separate keywords used 10 or more times across non-research articles. The top ten keywords among non-research articles were reported as primarily related to books and publishing, with “non-fiction,” “adult,” and “libraries” as the top three. By comparison, research articles heavily favour the use of keywords, with 94% (n=290) of research articles having keywords. Analysis of the individual keywords found 56 keywords appearing 10 or more times across research articles. The top ten keywords are primarily practice related, with “information,” “libraries,” and “library” being the top three. When comparing shared keywords across both categories, the same top three keywords reported for research in the previous sentence apply to the collective set. Conclusion – The authors note that the nature and size of the local collection both benefited and limited this study. Compiling and maintaining a comprehensive list of LIS periodicals is a challenging task across a large body of potential sources. Within the resulting periodicals studied, a mere 16% of analyzed LIS literature met the criteria to qualify as research, and that only after the study had eliminated virtually all trade periodicals from the population. Had that trade literature been included, the percentage qualifying as research would have been even lower. The popularity of surveys as a research method among LIS research reflects other recent findings, though the frequency of studies falling into the general “other” category suggests that LIS research is changing. Based on this research, the authors conclude that there is still much to be learned from content analysis of literature published in LIS periodicals. Future analyses could further examine the frequency of research methods used within LIS research.

scholarly journals Library and Information Science Research Literature is Chiefly Descriptive and Relies Heavily on Survey and Content Analysis Methods

2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 215
Author(s):  
Heather L Coates
Keyword(s):  
Content Analysis ◽  
English Language ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Medical Information ◽  
Research Literature ◽  
Practitioner Research ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
Research Approach

A Review of: Aytac, S. & Slutsky, B. (2014). Published librarian research, 2008 through 2012: Analyses and perspectives. Collaborative Librarianship, 6(4), 147-159. Objective – To compare the research articles produced by library and information science (LIS) practitioners, LIS academics, and collaborations between practitioners and academics. Design – Content analysis. Setting – English-language LIS literature from 2008 through 2012. Subjects – Research articles published in 13 library and information science journals. Methods – Using a purposive sample of 769 articles from selected journals, the authors used content analysis to characterize the mix of authorship models, author status (practitioner, academic, or student), topic, research approach and methods, and data analysis techniques used by LIS practitioners and academics. Main Results – The authors screened 1,778 articles, 769 (43%) of which were determined to be research articles. Of these, 438 (57%) were written solely by practitioners, 110 (14%) collaboratively by practitioners and academics, 205 (27%) solely by academics, and 16 (2%) by others. The majority of the articles were descriptive (74%) and gathered quantitative data (69%). The range of topics was more varied; the most popular topics were libraries and librarianship (19%), library users/information seeking (13%), medical information/research (13%), and reference services (12%). Pearson’s chi-squared tests detected significant differences in research and statistical approaches by authorship groups. Conclusion – Further examination of practitioner research is a worthwhile effort as is establishing new funding to support practitioner and academic collaborations. The use of purposive sampling limits the generalizability of the results, particularly to international and non-English LIS literature. Future studies could explore motivators for practitioner-academic collaborations as well as the skills necessary for successful collaboration. Additional support for practitioner research could include mentorship for early career librarians to facilitate more rapid maturation of collaborative research skills and increase the methodological quality of published research.

scholarly journals Developing the Knowledge Base of the Profession: Research in School Librarianship

2021 ◽  
pp. 55-76
Author(s):  
Laurel A. Clyde
Keyword(s):  
Longitudinal Study ◽  
Knowledge Base ◽  
Research Methods ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
International Context ◽  
Emerging Issues ◽  
School Librarianship ◽  
Conference Papers

This paper reports on one aspect of a wider longitudinal study of "Research and Researchers in School Librarianship". Research articles and conference papers published in English over the ten-year period 1991 to 2000 in the field of school librarianship were analyzed to identify the country of the research, the type of publication in which the research was reported, the research methods used, and the aspects of school librarianship that were investigated. Changes and trends in the research through the decade are described and emerging issues are discussed. The methodology draws on studies that looked at aspects of research in the broader field of library and information science generally, in an international context.

Journal packing density of library and information science research journals at the global level: a study

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ramesh Pandita ◽  
Shivendra Singh
Keyword(s):  
Packing Density ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
Global Level ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Journal Publishing ◽  
Research Journal ◽  
The Usa

Purpose This study aims to find out the average journal packing density (JPD) of Library and Information Science (LIS) research journals published across the world. The concept, JPD, means the average number of research articles published by a research journal in one volume. Accordingly, the undergoing study evaluates the average number of research articles published in each volume of each research journal published in the field of LIS at the global level. Some other key aspects evaluated include the number of LIS research journal publishing countries, average JPD of LIS research journals at the continental level, etc. Design/methodology/approach This study is purely based on secondary data retrieved from SCImago, which is SCOPUS data. Keeping in view the objectives of this study, the data about research articles published in all LIS research journals during the period 2015 through 2019 were retrieved to undertake the study. Findings From the data analysis, it emerged that 256 research journals duly indexed by SCOPUS are published in the field of LIS across 36 countries. In all 48,596 research articles were published from 2015 to 2019 in these research journals at an average of 44.71 research articles per journal per volume. More than 75% of LIS research journals are published from Germany, Spain, Netherlands, the USA and the UK. Research journals published from the USA have higher JPD of 53.09 research articles per journal per volume, which is 18.74% higher than the average global JPD of LIS research journals. 50% of LIS research journal publishing countries are from Europe and the majority 52.55% LIS research articles were published in European LIS research journals. The average JPD of LIS research journals published from North America is 51.73 research articles per journal per volume, which is the highest across continents. Research limitations/implications Standardization of JPD of research journals irrespective of the subject discipline they are published in is important for many reasons and the foremost being, such standardization helps in keeping at bay the predatory research journals, which normally float such packing density norms, with the sole aim to earn money in the shape of manuscript handling charges, thereby publishing a far greater number of research article in each issue of a journal than the average research articles published by a research journal. Originality/value Very few studies have been conducted around the concept JPD, especially by the authors of this particular study. This study has however been particularized to the LIS subject discipline, while the findings add to existing lot of study already undertaken, hence outcome can be generalized.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document