LIS journals categorization in the Journal Citation Report: a stated preference study | Scientometrics Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

LIS journals categorization in the Journal Citation Report: a stated preference study

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This stated preference study approached the issue on sub-categorization of the information science–library science (IS–LS) journals listed in the Journal Citation Report (JCR) 2011. To investigate this, 243 active authors/editors publishing in this field were requested to indicate their preferred category to 83 journal titles listed in JCR 2011 from four options: information science (IS), library science (LS), information systems (ISys) and do not know/undecided. Based on the popularity count, respondents assigned 39 titles to LS, 23 titles to IS and 21 titles to ISys. Twenty-five titles received high “do-not-know” counts—these are titles in non-English languages, information management and publishing sub-fields. Only one title in LS was grouped in the highest quartile by impact factor, compared to 8 titles in IS and 11 in ISys. This indicates that LS journals are hardly represented among the top 25 % of the impact factor distribution of JCR’s ranked IS–LS journals. Respondents show concern about the “fit” of information systems journals in the IS–LS category.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
¥17,985 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Japan)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abrizah, A., Zainab, A. N., Kiran, K., & Raj, R. G. (2013). LIS journals scientific impact and subject categorization: A comparison between Web of Science and Scopus. Scientometrics, 94, 721–740.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Archambault, E., & Gagné, E. V. (2004). The Use of bibliometrics in social sciences and humanities. Montreal: Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRCC).

    Google Scholar 

  • Astrom, F. (2002). Visualizing library and information science concept spaces through keyword and citation based maps and clusters. In H. Bruce, et al. (Eds.), The fourth International Conference on Conceptions of Library and Information Science, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, July 21–25 2002 (pp. 185–197). Greenwood Village: Libraries Unlimited.

  • Astrom, F. (2007). Changes in the LIS research front: Time sliced cocitation analyses of LIS journal articles, 1990–2004. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(7), 947–957.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Best, R. D., & Kneip, J. (2010). Library schools program and the successful training of academic librarians to meet promotion and tenure requirements in the academy. College & Research Libraries, 71(2), 97–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyack, K. W., Klavans, R., & Borner, K. (2005). Mapping the backbone of science. Scientometrics, 64(3), 351–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delgado-Lopez-Cozar, E., & Cabezas-Clarijo, A. (2013). Ranking journals: Could Google Scholar metrices be an alternative to journal citation report and Scimago journal rank? Learned Publishing, 26(2), 101–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glanzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2003). A new classification scheme of science fields and subfields designed for scientometric evaluation purposes. Scientometrics, 56(3), 357–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gravetter, F. J., & Forzano, L. A. B. (2008). Research methods for the behavioral sciences. Eastbourne, East Sussex: Gardners Books.

  • Harzing, A. W., & Van der Wal, R. (2008). Google scholar as a new source for citation analysis. Ethics, Science Environmental politics, 8, 61–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holsapple, C. W., Johnson, L. E., Manakyan, H., & Tanner, J. (1995). An empirical assessment and categorization of journals relevant to DSS research. Decision Support Systems, 14(4), 359–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janssens, F., Zhang, L., & Glanzel, W. (2009). Hybrid clustering validation and improvement of subject-classification schemes. Information Processing and Management, 45(6), 683–702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katz, J. S., & Hicks, D. (1995). The classification of interdisciplinary journals: A new approach. Brighton: Social Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30, 607–610.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L. (2007). Betweenness centrality as an indicator of interdisciplinarity of scientific journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(9), 1303–1319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydosdorff, L., & Rafols, I. (2009). A global map of science based on the ISI subject categories. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(2), 348–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milojevic, S., Sugimoto, C. R., Yan, E. J., & Ding, Y. (2011). The cognitive structure of library and information science: Analysis of article title words. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(10), 1933–1953.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moya-Anegon, F., Herrero-Solana, V., & Jimenez-Contreras, E. (2006). A connectionist and multivariate approach to science maps: The SOM, clustering and MDS applied to Library science research and information. Journal of Information Science, 32(1), 63–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ni, C. & Ding, Y. (2010). Journal clustering through interlocking editorship information. In Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 73rd ASIS&T Annual Meeting on Navigating Streams in an Information Ecosystem, Vol. 47, Pittsburgh, USA.

  • Ni, C. & Sugimoto, C. R. (2011). Four facets study of scholarly communities: Artifacts, producers, concepts and gatekeepers. In A. Grove (Ed.), Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (Vol. 48, pp. 9–12). Louisiana, USA: New Orleas.

  • Ni, C., Sugimoto, C. R., & Cronin, B. (2013). Visualizing and comparing four facets of scholarly communication: Producers, artifacts, concepts and gatekeepers. Scientometrics, 94(3), 1161–1173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nisonger, T. E. (2007). Journals in the core collection: Definition, identification and applications. The Serials Librarian: From the Printed Page to the Digital Age, 51(3/4), 51–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nisonger, T. E., & Davis, C. H. (2005). The perception of library and information science journals by LIS education deans and ARL library directors: A replication of the Kohl–Davis study. College & Research Libraries, 66(4), 341–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nixon, J. (2014). Core journals in library and information science: developing a methodology for ranking LIS journals. Libraries Faculty and Staff Scholarship and Research, Paper 61. http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1075&context=lib_fsdocs

  • Price, D. J. (1965). Networks of scientific papers. Science, 149, 510–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogelberg, S. G., & Stanton, J. M. (2007). Introduction: Understanding and dealing with organizational survey non-response. Organizational Research Methods, 10, 195–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Serenko, A., & Bontis, N. (2010). What’s familiar is excellent: The impact of exposure effect on perceived journal quality. Journal of Informetrics, 5(2011), 219–233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Serenko, A., Bontis, N., Booker, L., Sadeddin, K., & Hardie, T. (2010). A scientometric analysis of knowledge management and intellectual capital academic literature (1994–2008). Journal of Knowledge Management, 14(1), 3–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tahai, A., & Meyer, M. J. (1999). A revealed preference study of management journals’ direct influence. Strategic Management Journal, 20(3), 279–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tseng, Y. H., & Tsay, M. Y. (2013). Journal clustering of library and information science for subfield delineation using the bibliometric analysis toolkit: CATAR. Scientometrics, 95(2), 503–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waltman, L., Yan, E., & Van Eck, N. (2011). A recursive field-normalized bibliometric performance indicator: An application to the field of library and information science. Scientometrics, 89(1), 301–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Web of Science. (2002). Journal self-citation in the Journal Citation Reports—Science edition 2002. http://wokinfo.com/essays/journal-self-citation-jcr/. Accessed May 28, 2014.

  • Web of Science, Fact Sheet. (2012). http://thomsonreuters.com/business-unit/science/pdf/Web_of_Science_factsheet.pdf. Accessed Feb 7, 2013.

  • Zhang, L., Glanzel, W., & Liang, L. M. (2009a). Tracing the role of individual journals in a cross-citation network based on different indicators. Scientometrics, 81(3), 821–838.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, L., Janssens, F., Liang, L. M. & Glanzel, W. (2009). Hybrid clustering analysis for mapping large scientific domains. In B. Larsen, J. Leta (Eds.), Proceedings of ISSI 2009 The 12th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, Rio de Janeiro (pp. 178–188).

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was funded by the Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia (HIR-MOHE) UM.C/HIR/MOHE/FCSIT/H22001/00B00011.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Library and Information Science, Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

    A. Abrizah, A. Noorhidawati & A. N. Zainab

  2. Malaysian Citation Centre, Ministry of Education Malaysia, Putrajaya, Malaysia

    A. Abrizah

Authors
  1. A. Abrizah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. Noorhidawati
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. A. N. Zainab
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. Abrizah.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Abrizah, A., Noorhidawati, A. & Zainab, A.N. LIS journals categorization in the Journal Citation Report: a stated preference study. Scientometrics 102, 1083–1099 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1492-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1492-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation