An Analytical Study on the Publication Pattern and Impact of Top Research Papers: A Case Study of Information Processing and Management.
Sahoo, Jyotshna ; Mohanty, Basudev ; Dash, Ipsita 等
An Analytical Study on the Publication Pattern and Impact of Top Research Papers: A Case Study of Information Processing and Management.
1. Introduction
Journals have occupied a significant position in the scholarly
communication system. Though with the passage of time, the mode of
delivery of scholarly communication has changed from oral to the written
and then from print to electronic, the importance of journals has
remained unchanged and unaffected. Library and information science (LIS)
journals are one of the primary resources for communication that allows
professionals in the field to exchange new ideas and to put forth their
views on future developments in librarianship. With the recent advances
in information technology, more and more LIS journals are appearing in
electronic form alongside print form facilitating access to all
categories of users. These LIS journals play an important role both in
LIS education and in the development of librarianship practice. Journal
articles are accorded greater prestige and merit within the scholarly
community, relative to other forms of disseminating research findings.
As such, analysis of such research articles has attracted the attention
of the academic community in almost all fields of knowledge. It is
pointed out by (Anyi, Zainab & Anuar, 2002) that, "when a
single journal is studied bibliometrically, it creates a portrait of the
journal, providing a description that offers an insight that is beyond
the superficial. It can indicate the quality, maturity, and productivity
of the journal in any field, in a country or region. It also informs us
about the research orientation that it supports to disseminate. The
journal being studied is regarded as important or significant in the
field, important enough to be studied, to make inferences that the
journal speaks for authors who publish in the field and somehow reflect
the activity of research in the field. The journal being studied is
often assessed on its quality characteristics, the degree of impact it
achieves in a field, its ability to diffuse knowledge, the authorship
and collaboration pattern it projects in the field, its national or
international standing". Taking insight from such kinds of single
journal analysis, the present study examines the publication pattern of
Top 25 hottest articles (T25-HA) published in the journal
"Information Processing and Management" during the period
2008-2013.
2. Literature Review
Bibliometric study of single journals covering a period of time is
a favoured topic of research for the scholarly community not only in LIS
field but also in other academic disciplines. An increased demand is
perceived within many academic communities for bibliometric analysis in
the evaluation of research productivity. The number of publications
using the bibliometric analysis as a tool has been rising steadily
during recent years. Review of Literature for the present study covers
publications on single journal bibliometric analysis in Library &
Information Science, bibliometric analysis in several other disciplines,
works on relationship between article download and citations as well as
works on impact and quality of articles, impact of multi-authored works,
institutional research productivity etc. The LIS journals of
international nature studied bibliometrically are: Journal of the
American Society for Information Science and Technology, (Tsay, 2008);
Journal of Documentation (Tsay & Shu, 2011; Roy & Basak, 2013);
Malaysian Journal of Library And Information Science (Tiew, Abdullah
& Kaur, 2001; Bakri & Willett, 2008; Maharana & Das, 2013);
African Journal of Library, Archives and Information Science (Tella
& Olabooye, 2014); Internet Research (Swain, 2013); JASIST, IPM, JOD
(Tsay, 2011); Journal of Information Science (Tsay, 2011); Library
Trends (Das, 2013); Library Philosophy and Practice (Thanuskodi, 2010;
Verma, Sonker & Gupta, 2015); Library Review (Swain, Swain &
Rautaray, 2013); Reference Services Review (Mahraj, 2012; Clark, 2016);
The Electronic Library (Negi, 2017). The journals of national nature
are: Library Herald (Thanuskodi, 2011; Kumar, 2014); IASLIC Bulletin
(Panda, Mohanty & Sahoo, 2011); Pakistan Journal of Library and
Information Science (Warraich & Ahmad, 2011). DESIDOC Journal of
Library and Information Technology (Kumar & Moorthy, 2011; Pandita,
2014; Bapte, 2017); International Research: Journal of Library and
Information Science (Shukla, Moyon, 2017); and Pearl: A Journal of
Library and Information Science (Singh, 2017).
2.1. LIS journals studied Bibliometrically
Tiew, Abdullah and Kaur (2002) studied the "Malaysian Journal
of Library and Information Science"(MJLIS) covering the period
1996-2000. Bakri and Willett (2008) analysed publication and citation
patterns of the journal MJLIS from 2001-2006 and compared the results
with those obtained in an earlier study by Tiew, Abdullah and Kaur
(2002). Tsay (2008) explored the relationship between "Journal of
the American Society for Information Science and Technology"
(JASIST) and other disciplines by citation analysis. The results
revealed that JASIST itself is the most highly cited journal followed by
four LIS journals, namely "Information Processing and Management
", "Journal of Documentation", "Annual Review of
Information Science and Technology" and "Journal of
Information Science". Thanuskodi (2010) did a bibliometric study of
249 articles published during the period from 2005-09 in the journal
"Library Philosophy and Practice" and the results revealed
that the highest number of articles have appeared in the area of
computer application in library and information science. Tsay& Shu
(2011) studied the journal bibliometric characteristics of the
"Journal of Documentation" (JOD) and the subject relationship
with other disciplines by citation analysis. Another study for the same
JOD conducted by Roy & Basak (2013) revealed that majority of papers
are multi-authored. The geographical distribution reveals that the
contribution by the United Kingdom is the highest. Tsay (2011) studied
the bibliometric characteristics of the "Journal of Information
Science" (JIS) and made a citation analysis of the journal to find
out the subject relationship of LIS with other disciplines. Publication
output, authorship pattern, subject coverage of publications,
institutional productivity citation analysis etc. are the different
dimensions of bibliometric studies conducted across the LIS journals of
national nature. Isiakpona (2012) conducted abibliometric study of
"Library & Information Science Research Electronic
Journal" and results revealed that, most of the articles were
within the general subject area of Library and Information Science and
were written by a single author and the majority of the publications
were contributed by authors affiliated to universities. Das (2013)
conducted a bibliometric study of 206 articles published in the journal
"Library Trends" from 2007-2012. Results show that majority of
authors preferred to publish their research results in individual
authorship mode. Tella & Olabooye (2014) in their study of
"African Journal of Library, Archives & Information Science
" indicated that the majority of the articles were theoretical
papers, while the others were empirical papers, book reviews, and short
communications. Verma, Sonker and Gupta (2015) conducted a bibliometric
study of the e-journal Library Philosophy and Practice and found that
there is a predominance of single authored works and highest number of
articles are published on library services. Negi (2017) examined the
articles published in the journal "The Electronic Library"
during 2007-2016 and explored contribution of Indian authors' in
the journal and found that the authors of India have contributed 101
articles out of 576 articles which are quite appreciative. All the
reviewed journals give a vivid account of the publication pattern and
research orientation of the respective journals.
2.2. Journals in Other disciplines studied bibliometrically
Apart from LIS journals, bibliometric studies conducted in other
disciplines for journals like: Journal of Advanced Nursing (Zeleznik,
Vosner&Kokol, 2017); Journal of Business Research (Merigo et al.,
2015); Computers in Human Behavior (Vosner, et al., 2016); Information
Sciences (Yu, et al., 2017) International Journal of Intelligent Systems
(Merigo, et al., 2017); International Journal of Mental Health Systems
(Minas, et al., 2014); Journal of Mathematical Chemistry (Restrepo &
Willett, 2017); and Journal of School Health (Zhang, et al., 2017)
Computers & Industrial Engineering (Cancino et al., 2017).While
Zeleznik, Vosner &Kokol (2017) identified the most prolific authors,
papers, institutions and countries of Journal of Advanced Nursing,
Merigo et al., (2015) highlighted on the publication pattern, citation
structure and the most cited articles in the Journal of Business
Research, Vosner, et al., (2016) focused on the trends of research
literature production, the established patterns of cooperation among
countries and institutions and the most productive research themes and
their evolution through time using VOS viewer software. Yu, et al.,
(2017) studied the most cited authors, most representative articles, top
influential institutions, the co-citation network of knowledge structure
and emerging trends of research of INS using CiteSpace, a data
visualization software. Using VOS viewer, Merigo, et al., (2017)
depicted the bibliographic coupling of authors and co-citation of
documents in IJIS. Minas, et al., (2014) studied the geographic reach
and international collaboration of the Journal of Mental Health Systems.
Restrepo & Willett (2017) focused on the citation impact of the
articles and the cognate areas from the citations come from in the
journal of Mathematical Chemistry. Zhang et al. (2017) highlighted on
the cooperation network of high frequency authors using CiteSpace.
Cancino et al., (2017) identified the leading trends of the journal
Computers & Industrial Engineering (CIE) in terms of impact, topics,
universities and countries and made graphical analysis citation
connections in terms of bibliographic coupling, co-citation, citation,
coauthorship and co-occurrence of keywords using VOS viewer software.
2.3. Studies on article download and citations
Davis et al. (2008) measured the effect of free access to the
scientific literature on article downloads and citations and revealed
that open access articles had more downloads but exhibited no increase
in citations in the year after publication. Open access publishing may
reach more readers than subscription access publishing but the citation
advantage of open access may be an artefact of other explanations such
as self selection. Jahandideh (2007) in his study on prediction of
future citations of a research paper from number of its internet
downloads found out that, more citations have been done to hottest
articles at the same period compared to non-hottest articles. The study
investigated that more downloads at a limited period of time is an
indicator of more citations to the article in long term interval.
Singson, Thiyagarajan and Leeladharan (2016) examined the relationship
between electronic journal downloads to find out whether online
electronic resource usage can be adopted as an alternative to citation
for evaluation of scholarly discourse. Results revealed that Journal IF
and price significantly influence usage and journal IF plays an
important role in the intensity of the use.
2.4. Works on measuring impact of articles, authors and
institutions
Li et al. (2017) developed a framework of 17 article level
indicators and basing upon these indicators conducted an experiment to
rank Chinese institutions in the field of Information Management. The
findings revealed that among the article count indicators, the Straight
count indicator is significantly different than others and the rankings
based on the indicators which are weighted by quality are consistent
with those based on the indicators using article count. Levitt and
Thelwall (2011) developed a new hybrid indicator known as weighted sum
indicator to predict the impact of articles. This new indicator is the
weighted sum of two indicators in common usage that is the
article's total number of citations in a citation window, and the
Impact Factor of the journal in which the article was published. The
results show that for citation windows of 0 or 1 years, the correlation
of the simplified weighted sum with long-term citation is substantially
higher than the correlation of the standard indicator of article
citation with long-term citation. Fiala (2012) measured country shares
in publications indexed by CiteSeer and compared them to those based on
mainstream bibliographic data from the Web of Science and Scopus using
several non-recursive as well as recursive methods such as citation
counts or PageRank. The author concluded that even if East Asian
countries are underrepresented in CiteSeer, its data may well be used
along with other conventional bibliographic databases for comparing the
computer science research productivity and performance of countries.
Suarez-Balseiro, Garcia-Zorita and Sanz-Casado (2009) used
multi-dimensional indicators and multivariate analysis techniques, to
analyze and represent the visibility of the papers published in
mainstream scientific journals. The results of the study show that the
establishment and furtherance of local and international co-authorship
favour the visibility of the papers.
3. Data and Method:
The study is based upon 550 research articles published in the
journal "Information Processing and Management (IP&M). IP&M
is a leading international journal published by Elsevier and cited under
Science Direct Database. This journal is devoted to reporting of basic
and applied research in information science, computer science, cognitive
science, management of information resources, services, systems and
networks and digital libraries. The Cite Score of the journal is: 2.83
and the impact factor is 2.391. While Cite Score values are based on
citation counts in a given year (e.g. 2014) to documents published in
three previous calendar years (e.g. 2011-13), divided by the number of
documents in these three previous years (e.g. 2011-13), impact factor of
a journal is calculated by dividing the number of current year citations
to the source items published in that journal during the previous two
years. All the 550 articles are indexed under Science Direct database
under its Top 25 hottest articles (T25-HA) category from
2008-2013(April-June) for the journal IP&M. The top 25 is a free
quarterly service which provides lists of most read articles counted by
article downloads on Science Direct and as a result it cites 100 hottest
papers in a year. For all the 550 papers included in the study during
the above period, a database was developed incorporating essential
fields viz. title of the article, year of publication, number of
authors, name of authors with institutional and geographical affiliation
of the authors, number of citations received to the articles, length of
articles using the MS-Excel spreadsheet. Finally subsequent analysis and
interpretation of the data is done as per the research questions.
4. Research Questions (RQ):
RQ 1: How are the 550 hottest articles of IP&M distributed over
time?
RQ 2: What are the general characteristics of the authorship
pattern of IP&M publications? Is there any relationship between mean
authorship and degree of collaboration of IP&M literature?
RQ 3: Does the productivity of authors' conform to the
Lotka's law?
RQ 4: How does productivity index help to classify the level of
productions in IP&M literature with regard to the Lotka's
classical method?
RQ 5: Who are the authors whose works are most read and downloaded
among others? Is there any reasonableness for such high downloads with
LIS research areas?
RQ 6: Which countries have made a significant impact with respect
to the different level of contributions on the IP&M publications?
RQ 7: Which institutions have a visible impact as regards to
IP&M publications?
RQ 8: What subject areas do these Top 25-Hottest Articles (T25-HA)
focus on in terms of most preferred research areas of IP&M?
RQ 9: What are the works that have downloaded more times and on
which research areas of IP&M?
RQ 10: What is the preferred range of IP&M publications on the
basis of pagination pattern?
RQ 11: What are the works that have fetched more citations than
other articles in IP&M?
5. Results and Discussion:
RQ-1: How do the 550 hottest articles are distributed over time?
To address the RQ-1, the chronological distribution of the 550 top
research papers is derived on the basis of year of publication of each
article. It is to be noted here that, all the 550 articles which are
cited under the top-25 category for each quarter in a year during the
period from 2008 to 2013 were originally published during the time
period from 1992 to 2013. Out of the total 550 T25HA category, the
highest number of articles (401, 72.90%) are published during the period
from 2006-2013 followed by the time span from 2000-2006 (129, 23.46%)
and 1992-1999(20, 3.64%) respectively. As T25-HA category is determined
on the basis of articles downloaded, it is clearly reflected that users
have referred articles of recent publications mostly published from 2000
onwards. So it is interpreted that, users have taken much interest in
currently published research works.
RQ-2: what are the general characteristics of the authorship
pattern of IP&M publications? Is there any relationship between mean
authorship and degree of collaboration of IP&M literature?
Table--2 deals with authorship pattern and collaboration among
authors for the 550 articles published in the journal IP&M that
meets the RQ-2. It is observed that the total 550 numbers of T25-HA are
contributed by 1293 numbers of authors which brings the average number
of authors per paper is 2.4. Out of 550 papers, 152(27.63%) numbers of
papers are contributed by single authors, and 398 (72.37%) numbers of
papers are by multiple authors. A steady increase in the mean authorship
(from 2.2 to 2.4) as well as in the collaboration pattern of authors
(from 0.45 to 0.78) is clearly reflected during the period of study. The
degree of collaboration (DC) among authors is found to be 0.72 (398/
(398+152)) which is calculated using Subramanian's formula
(Subramanian, 1983). The high value of DC (0.72) indicates that
multi-authored contributions occupy the prominent position that means
collaborative research work has dominance over sole authorship works in
IP& M. Thus, it can be stated that there is a directly proportional
relationship between these two bibliometric parameters i.e. higher the
values of collaborative co-efficient exhibit high values of mean
authorships and vice versa.
RQ-3: Does the productivity of authors' conform to the
Lotka's law?
The RQ-3 is to assess the productivity of authors of IP&M
publications for which Lotka's Law has been applied to the category
of T25-HA. Lotka's Law (1926) describes the frequency of
publications by authors in any given field. The general formula of
Lotka's Law is:
[X.sup.n] Y = C = > n = Log C - Log Y/Log X Where,
X = Number of publications (1, 2, 3 ..., n)
Y = Relative frequency of authors with X publications
C = Constant which is equal to number of contributors with minimal
Productivity
n = Parameter "n" can be calculated by the least square
method
Measuring of author productivity is a vital part of the metric
study which is induced for IP&M papers and presented in table 3
using Lotka's derivation. It is observed that 190 numbers of
authors out of 393 have contributed single paper each and its proportion
is 48.35% which gives the value of Constant(C) that is equal to number
of contributors with minimal Productivity. Table 3 gives the value of
"n" using the above equation and the mean value of
"n" is found to be 1.87. Using the value of Parameter
"n" (1.87), the estimated frequencies of authors are
calculated and presented in table 3. Figure--2 illustrates the variation
of observed and estimated authors' percentile with their
contributions.
In order to test the applicability of Lotka's law to a set of
data, a statistical test (goodness-of-fit) is needed. The K-S
(Kolmogorov-Smirnov) test determines the maximum deviation (D) as under:
D = Max [absolute value of (Fo(x)-Sn(x))] where,
Fo(X) ~ is the theoretical cumulative frequency function and
Sn(X) ~ is the observed cumulative frequency function
At a 0.01 level of significance, the K-S statistic is equal to
1.63/[square root of (n)]. If D is greater than the K-S statistic, then
the sample distribution does not fit the theoretical distribution. As
shown in table 4, D from the IP&M sample data is 0.0509 which is
less than the K-S statistic i.e. 1.63/[square root of (663)] ~ 0.0863.
Therefore Lotka's generalized formula with exponent value
"n" (1.87) fits to the IP&M sample.
RQ-4: How does productivity index help to classify the level of
productions in IP&M literature with regard to the Lotka's
classical method?
With regard to the Lotka's classical method to test the
regularity in publication activity of authors as cited above, the index
called Productivity Index (PI) (Garcia, 2005; Sevukan, 2007) had been
applied to identify the level of productions in IP&M literature. The
PI is the logarithm of the values of n publications for each author
which helped to find out three classical levels as shown in table--5.
The PI revels that occasional producers (48.35% authors) who published
only one paper each (PI = 0)) contribute 14.69% of total IP&M
literature, the intermediate producers (42.49% authors) who published
2-9 papers (0 < PI < 1) contribute 38.44% of total IP&M
literature while larger producers (only 9.16% authors) who published
more than 10 papers (PI >= 1) produce 46.87% of total IP&M
literature.
RQ-5: Who are the authors whose works are most read and downloaded
among others? Is there any reasonableness for such high downloads with
LIS research areas?
In order to address the RQ-5, the rank list of the most prolific
authors contributed to IP&M publications during the period of study
is provided in Table 6. Here the rank lists of prolific authors are
derived on the basis of number of times the articles of the authors are
downloaded. It is found that Bernard J. Jansen occupies the first rank
who has contributed seven unique articles during the study period, but
the seven articles all together downloaded 55 times in different
quarters. It is seen that number of articles contributed by the authors
varies from one (1) to seven (7) and the corresponding download varies
from eighteen (18) to fifty-five (55).The ten prolific authors are from
five countries viz. USA (6-authors) and one each from the countries of
Denmark, Taiwan, UK, and Greece. The H-index of the prolific authors is
provided in Table-6 in which a wide variation (from minimum 4 to highest
57) is observed. It is to be noted further that Bernard J. Jansen from
USA who has highest contributions (7) and highest downloads (55) has
also the distinction of highest h-index 57 among the prolific authors.
In order to assess the reasonableness for such high downloads
across the 18 unique contributions of the 10 prolific authors; the
research areas dealt are examined. All the eighteen papers focus on
relatively new areas of research in LIS like online searching, analysis
of search engine transaction logs, analysis of user queries on the web,
effectiveness of web search engines, ontology-based query expansion,
collaborative information behaviour, text mining, model for digital
library, user perception of electronic resources etc. Thus, It can be
inferred that as an academic discipline LIS is a developing and
expanding field, emerging areas are coming up and users have shown their
significant interest in the latest areas of research than the
traditional LIS research areas, and there is a significant impact of
information technology on the LIS discipline.
RQ-6: Which countries have made a significant impact with respect
to the different level of contributions on the IP&M publications?
Assessment of country and institutional research productivity has a
long-standing tradition of research impact analysis. Ranking the
institutional research productivity enhances the reputation of an
organization or a university and affects its ability to raise funds and
reflects the relative position of the institution among others with
regard to a specific research interest. Moreover, the volume and impact
of academic publications are believed to reflect the nation's
scientific wealth. The rank list of the countries and institutions are
derived on the basis of number of downloads done from these institutions
affiliated with the names of the first authors of the publications which
address RQ 5 and 6. It is reflected that T25-HA are contributed from 36
unique countries, whereas the top ten countries contributed highest
papers (496) which is (89.81%) of the entire publication. Out of the top
ten countries, it is observed that the USA prominently leads the list
with 236 (42.9%) number of papers among other top contributing countries
followed by UK, Taiwan, and Denmark. These top four countries can be
considered as larger producers as contribute around 70% of total hottest
papers. Other 6 countries namely Australia, Brazil, Greece, Spain,
China, and Canada can be considered as intermediate producers with 20%
contributions while rest 26 countries can be considered as occasional
producers with only less than 10% of total contributions. Though USA
leads among affiliated countries but contributions from other mentioned
countries reflect the global character of the IP&M journal.
RQ-7: Which institutions have a visible impact as regards to
IP&M publications?
Similarly, as regards to the institutional profile of the T25-HA,
there are 7 universities placed in the top 10 categories. School of
Information Science and Technology, the Pennsylvania State University of
USA leads the other institutions credited with the highest download of
articles (63). Adding to this University, three other Universities from
USA also occupied rank 3, 5 and 9 respectively (122 downloads affiliated
to four universities of USA). The other 6 universities belong to the
countries of Denmark, Taiwan, UK, Brazil, Greece and Australia. It is
reflected that, universities have contributed significantly to IP&M
publications and faculties working in universities are more active in
research work.
RQ-8: What subject areas do these Top 25-Hottest Articles (T25-HA)
focus on in terms of most preferred research areas of IP&M?
In order to assess the subject areas of T25-HA and to meet the RQ8,
all the full-text articles are examined thoroughly. Topic categories are
designated out of the patterns emerged from analyzing the content of
each and every article. It is found that a wide variety of topics are
covered in the journal during the study period. An integration of
traditional topics of LIS studied with new perspectives as well as
emerging areas of research are seen. All the research themes are
classified in order from highest amount of coverage to least to find out
most preferred areas. It is observed that works on only a few aspects
such as information retrieval, information need of various user groups,
digitization, and digital library are the most preferred areas of
research as 50% of the articles are focused on these and related areas.
Next to it are moderately preferred areas of research which constitute
10 areas that account for 45% of the total research. Under this group
some relatively new aspects of LIS discipline such as KM, text mining,
web search engine, semantic web and web ontology are discovered. Third
category of LIS research includes 8 areas like information system,
sentiment analysis, open access, pioneers of online age, digital
qualities of humanities research, patent collaboration, literature
aggregation, mobile information management etc. As very fewer numbers of
research paper focused on these areas, it is designated as least
preferred areas of research which account for 5% of the total topic
categories. However, many new areas of research like sentiment analysis,
emotion recognition, and patent collaboration are found under this
category.
RQ-9: What are the works that have downloaded more times and focus
on which research areas of LIS in IP&M?
The unit of analysis of this paper is T25-HA of IP&M. Out of
these 550 articles Table 10 provides the top 10 articles on the basis of
maximum download count that addresses the RQ 9. An examination of the
contents of the articles reveals these top downloaded works are
relatively new areas of research in LIS field and there is a greater
impact of the developments of IT, internet and web resources on LIS
discipline. These 10 highest downloaded articles are focused towards
various aspects of IT and ICT like website design, search engine,
digital library, effective information retrieval, e-resources, text
mining techniques etc.
RQ-10: What is the preferred range of IP&M publications on the
basis of pagination pattern?
RQ 10 is about the page length of IP&M publications depicted in
Table 11. Out of the 550 T25HA, highest (294) numbers of papers are
within 11-20 pages which accounts for 53.5% of the total pagination
pattern followed by 155 articles which are within 21-30 pages, 56
articles within the page range of 1-10 pages, and 45 articles within
31-40 pages. The preferred page range of IP&M publications is
between 11-20 pages as more than 73% of total papers are within this
range.
RQ-11: What are the works that have fetched more citations than
other articles in IP&M?
RQ 11 is about the citation pattern of the T25-HA articles. The
Scopus citation data for all the 154 unique (together downloaded 550
times) articles are collected, and out of this, 10 most cited papers are
reported in Table 12. Such citation analysis is essential for many
reasons. It is of significant value to the authors, whose work is
accounted among the most cited works; these studies identify the seminal
works in the discipline, illustrate the development of the literature
over a period of time and map the critical intellectual trends within
the field. It helps to determine which issues have been central to the
field and identify those individuals who have made significant
contributions to the field. All the unique 154 articles have received
12698 citations, whereas the top 10 most cited paper account for 21.6%
citations. Eight out of the top ten papers have more than 200 citations,
and authors of five papers have affiliations in the United States. Apart
from USA top cited papers are from other countries like China, Japan,
UK, Denmark and Finland which reflects internationalization of LIS
research as regards to IP&M publication.
Most of the top ten highly cited articles are oriented towards
studying and analyzing web queries, web search engines. While
traditional topics like information seeking behavior, information
retrieval, and classification are of interest to the academia but these
topics are studied from new perspectives.
6. Conclusion
Libraries as a purveyor of knowledge ventured early into the field
of ICT for delivering information services to its users and the LIS
research too not far lagging behind the trend. It is quite encouraging
that LIS as an academic discipline shows a developmental trend with
multiple new areas of research and the scholarly community are
inquisitive to keep themselves abreast of the latest developments in the
field. In this study, the publication pattern of Top 25 hottest articles
(T25-HA) published in the journal Information Processing and Management,
as well as the value of various bibliometrics indicators derived, shows
the popularity, the quality as well as the impact of IP&M
publications in LIS literature. This subject analysis of T25-HA on the
basis of top downloads and citation received provides an insight into
the development of LIS discipline during the period covered and
indicates the subject trends and significant issues dealt through
IP&M publications. These indicators, not only helps editorial boards
to re-evaluate their journal but also to the researchers, librarians and
academic administrators to identify their core journals.
References:
(1.) Anyi K. W. U., Zainab A. N., & Anuar N. B. (2009).
Bibliometric studies on single journals: a review. Malaysian Journal of
Library & Information Science, 14(1), 17-55.
(2.) Bakri, A., & Willett, P. (2008). The Malaysian Journal of
Library & Information Science 2001-2006: A Bibliometric Study.
Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science, 13(1), 103-116
(3.) Bapte, V. D. (2017). DESIDOC Journal of Library and
Information Technology (DJLIT): A Bibliometric Analysis of Cited
References. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology,
37(4), 264-269. https://doi.org/10.14429/dilit.37.4.10712
(4.) Cancino, C., Merigo, J. M., Coronado, F., Dessouky, Y., &
Dessouky, M. (2017). Forty years of Computers & Industrial
Engineering: A bibliometric analysis. Computers & Industrial
Engineering, 113, 614-629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2017.08.033
(5.) Clark, K. W. (2016). Reference Services Review: content
analysis, 2012-2014. Reference Services Review, 44(1), 61-75.
https://doi.org/10.1108/RSR-06-2015-0031
(6.) Das, T. (2013). A bibliometric analysis of contributions in
the journal Library Trends. Library Philosophy and Practice (E-Journal).
Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/1014
(7.) Davis, P. M., Lewenstein, B. V., Simon, D. H., Booth, J. G.,
& Connolly, M. J. L. (2008). Open access publishing, article
downloads, and citations: randomised controlled trial. The BMJ,
337:a568. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.a568
(8.) Fiala, D. (2012). Bibliometric analysis of CiteSeer data for
countries. Information Processing & Management, 48(2), 242-253.
https://doi.org/10.1016/i.ipm.2011.10.001
(9.) Garcia, P., et al. (2005). Evolution of Spanish Scientific
Production in International Obstetrics and Gynecology Journals during
the period 1986-2002. Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and
Reproductive Biology, 123, 150-156.
(10.) Jahandideh, S., Abdolmaleki, P., & Asadabadi, E. B.
(2007). Prediction of future citations of a research paper from number
of its internet downloads. Medical Hypotheses, 69(2), 458-459.
https://doi.org/10.1016/i.mehy.2007.01.007
(11.) Kumar, M., & Moorthy, A. L. (2011). Bibliometric Analysis
of DESIDOC Journal of Library and Information Technology from 2001-2010.
DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology, 31(3).
https://doi.org/10.14429/dilit.3L3.989
(12.) Kumar, Mahendra (2014). Library Herald Journal: A
Bibliometric Study. Journal of Education & Social Policy. (1)2.
(13.) Levitt, J. M., & Thelwall, M. (2011). A combined
bibliometric indicator to predict article impact. Information Processing
& Management, 47(2), 300-308.
https://doi.org/10.1016/fipm.2010.09.005
(14.) Li, J., Wu, D., Li, J., & Li, M. (2017). A comparison of
17 article-level bibliometric indicators of institutional research
productivity: Evidence from the information management literature of
China. Information Processing & Management, 53(5), 1156-1170.
https://doi.org/10.1016/fipm.2017.05.002
(15.) Lotka, A. J. (1926). Frequency distribution of scientific
productivity. Journal of Washington Academic Science, 16(12), 317-323.
(16.) Maharana, R. K., & Das, A. K. (2013). Bibliometric
Analysis of Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science
(MJLIS) During 2007-2011. eLibrary Science Research Journal, 1(10),
1-11.
(17.) Mahraj, K. (2012). Reference Services Review: content
analysis, 2006-2011. Reference Services Review, 40(2), 182-198.
https://doi.org/10.1108/00907321211228237
(18.) Merigo, J. M., Blanco-Mesa, F., Gil-Lafuente, A. M., &
Yager, R. R. (2017). Thirty Years of the International Journal of
Intelligent Systems: A Bibliometric Review. International Journal of
Intelligent Systems, 32(5), 526-554. https://doi.org/10.1002/int.21859
(19.) Merigo, J. M., Mas-Tur, A., Roig-Tierno, N., &
Ribeiro-Soriano, D. (2015). A bibliometric overview of the Journal of
Business Research between 1973 and 2014. Journal of Business Research,
68(12), 2645-2653. https://doi.org/10.1016/i.ibusres.2015.04.006
(20.) Minas, H., Wright, A., Zhao, M., & Kakuma, R. (2014).
International iournal of mental health systems: a bibliometric study.
International Journal of Mental Health Systems, 8(1).
https://doi.org/10.1186/1752-4458-8-1
(21.) Negi U. (2017). The Electronic Library, 2007-2016: A
Bibliometric Study. J Adv Res Lib Inform Sci, 4(4), 30-36.
https://doi.org/10.24321/2395.2288.201710
(22.) Panda, J. Mohanty, B. and Sahoo, J. (2011). Mapping of
Publication Pattern of IASLIC Bulletin: A decade's Analysis
(2000-2009), IASLiC Bulletin, 56(3), 234-243.
(23.) Pandita, R. (2014). DESIDOC Journal of Library and
Information Technology (DJLIT): A Bibliometric Study (2003-12). Library
Philosophy and Practice (E-Journal). Retrieved from
https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/1038
(24.) Restrepo, G., & Willett, P. (2017). The Journal of
Mathematical Chemistry: a bibliometric profile. Journal of Mathematical
Chemistry, 55(8), 1589-1596. https://doi .org/10.1007/s10910-017-0747-7
(25.) Roy, S., & Basak, M. (2013). Journal of Documentation: a
Bibliometric Study. Library Philosophy and Practice (E-Journal).
Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/945
(26.) Sevukan, R. et. al. (2007). Research Output of Faculties of
Plant Sciences in Central Universities of India: a Bibliometric Study,
Annals of Library and Information Sciences, 54, 129-139.
(27.) Shukla, A., & Moyon, N. T. (2017). International
Research--Journal of Library and Information Science: A Bibliometric
Analysis. Library Philosophy and Practice (E-Journal). Retrieved from
https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/1530
(28.) Singh, J. (2017). Bibliometric Analysis of Pearl: A Journal
of Library and Information. Asian Journal of Information Science and
Technology. 7 (2), 1-7.
(29.) Singson, M., Thiyagarajan, S., & Leeladharan, M. (2016).
Relationship between electronic journal downloads and citations in
library consortia. Library Review, 65(6/7), 429-444. https://doi
.org/10.1108/LR-02-2016-0019
(30.) Suarez-Balseiro, C., Garcia-Zorita, C., & Sanz-Casado, E.
(2009). Multi-authorship and its impact on the visibility of research
from Puerto Rico. Information Processing & Management, 45(4),
469-476. https://doi.org/10.1016/i.ipm.2009.03.001
(31.) Swain, C., Swain, D. K., & Rautaray, B. (2013).
Bibliometric analysis of Library Review from 2007 to 2011. Library
Review, 62(8/9), 602-618. https://doi.org/10.1108/LR-02-20130012
(32.) Swain, D. K. (2013). Journal Bibliometric Analysis: A Case
Study on Internet Research. Library Philosophy and Practice (E-Journal).
Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/985
(33.) Tella, A., & Olabooye, A. A. (2014). Bibliometric
analysis of African Journal of Library, Archives and Information Science
from 2000-2012. Library Review, 63(4/5), 305-323. https://doi
.org/10.1108/LR-07-2013-0094
(34.) Thanuskodi, S. (2010). Bibliometric Analysis of the Journal
Library Philosophy and Practice from 2005-2009. Library Philosophy and
Practice (E-Journal). Retrieved from
https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/437
(35.) Thanuskodi, S. (2011). Library Herald Journal: A Bibliometric
Study. Researchers World: Journal of Arts, Science and Commerce
(RW-JASC), 2(4). 68-76.
(36.) Tiew, W. S., Abdullah, A., & Kaur, K. (2001). Malaysian
Journal of Library and Information Science 1996-2000: a bibliometric
study. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science, 6(1),
43-56.
(37.) Tsay, M. (2008). Journal bibliometric analysis: a case study
on the JASIST. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science,
13(2), 121-139
(38.) Tsay, M. (2011). A bibliometric analysis and comparison on
three information science journals: JASIST, IPM, JOD, 1998-2008.
Scientometrics, 89(2), 591. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0460-4
(39.) Tsay, M., & Shu, Z. (2011). Journal bibliometric
analysis: a case study on the Journal of Documentation. Journal of
Documentation, 67(5), 806-822. https://doi.org/10.1108/00220411111164682
(40.) Tsay, Ming-Yueh. (2011) Bibliometric Analysis on the Journal
of Information Science. Journal of Library and Information Science
Research, (5) 2, 1-28.
(41.) Verma, A., Sonkar, S., & Gupta, V. (2015). A Bibliometric
Study of the Library Philosophy and Practice (E-Journal) For the Period
2005-2014. Library Philosophy and Practice (E-Journal). Retrieved from
https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/1292
(42.) Vosner, H. B., Kokol, P., Bobek, S., Zeleznik, D., &
Zavrsnik, J. (2016). A bibliometric retrospective of the Journal
Computers in Human Behavior (1991-2015). Computers in Human Behavior,
65, 46-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/i.chb.2016.08.026
(43.) Warraich, N. F., & Ahmad, S. (2011). Pakistan Journal of
Library and Information Science: A bibliometric analysis. Pakistan
Journal of Information Management and Libraries. Retrieved January 15,
2018, from http://eprints.rclis.org/25600/
(44.) Yu, D., Xu, Z., Pedrycz, W., & Wang, W. (2017).
Information sciences 1968-2016: A retrospective analysis with text
mining and bibliometric. Information Sciences, 418-419, 619-634.
https://doi.org/10.1016/nns.2017.08.031
(45.) Zeleznik, D., Blazun Vosner, H., & Kokol, P. (2017). A
bibliometric analysis of the Journal of Advanced Nursing, 1976-2015.
Journal of Advanced Nursing, 75(10), 2407-2419.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ian.13296
(46.) Zhang, C.-C., Zheng, X., Su, C.-H., Huang, H., Yan, F.-R.,
Pan, X.-J., ... Jin, Z.-Z. (2017). A bibliometric study of the Journal
of School Health: 1965-2014. Chinese Nursing Research, 4(2), 75-83.
https://doi.org/10.1016/i.cnre.2017.03.011
Dr. Jyotshna Sahoo (a)
a Associate Professor & Head, Department of Library and
Information Science, Khallikote University University,
Berhampur--760001, Odisha, India.
Dr. Basudev Mohanty (b, c), *
(b) Scientific Officer, Institute of Physics, Bhubaneswar-751005,
Odisha, India.
(c) Homi Bhabha National Institute, BARC Training School Complex,
Anushakti Nagar, Mumbai-400085, India. * Corresponding Author. E-mail:
Basudev_mohanty@rediffmail.com, Ph: 7064419608
Ms. Ipsita Dash (d)
(d) Mayurbhanj Law College, University Road, Baripada,
Mayurbhanj-757001, Odisha, India.
Jyotshna Sahoo
Sambalpur University
Basudev Mohanty
Institute of Physics, Bhubaneswar, basudev_mohanty@rediffmail.com
Ipsita Dash
Mayurbhanj Law College
Caption: Figure 1: Mean Authorship and degree of collaboration of
T25-HA
Caption: Figure 2: Trend of Observed v/s Estimated Authors with
their contributions
Table 1: Chronological Distribution of Top 25 Hottest Article (T25-
HA) of IP&M Publications
Sl. No. Year of T25-HA % Cumulative No.
publication of IP&M
1 1992-1999 20 3.64 20
2 2000-2006 129 23.46 149
3 2006-2013 401 72.90 550
Total 550 100
Table 2: Authorship pattern and degree of collaboration
Single Multi- No. of Total
Author Author Papers Authorship
Year Papers Papers (RP) (TA)
1992 to 1999 11 9 20 34
2000-2006 53 76 129 283
2006-2013 88 313 401 976
152 398
Total (27.63%) (72.37%) 550 1293
Mean Degree of
Year Authorship Collaboration
1992 to 1999 1.7 0.45
2000-2006 2.2 0.59
2006-2013 2.4 0.78
Total 2.4 0.72
Table 4: Kolmogorov-Smirnov (K-S) Goodness-of-fit test
Observed Authors
Relative
No. of Cumulative Frequency
contributions No. Frequency {Sn(x)}
1 190 190 0.5322
2 89 279 0.7815
3 33 312 0.8739
4 24 336 0.9412
5 12 348 0.9748
6 3 351 0.9832
7 3 354 0.9916
8 2 356 0.9972
9 1 357 1.0000
Total 357
Estimated Authors
Relative
No. of Cumulative Frequency
contributions No. Frequency {Sn(x)}
1 190 190 0.5793
2 57 247 0.7527
3 28 275 0.8383
4 17 292 0.8902
5 12 304 0.9255
6 8 312 0.9511
7 6 318 0.9707
8 5 323 0.9862
9 4 328 0.9989
Total 328
Deviation Dmax
Max
of
[absolute
No. of D=Fo(x)- value of
contributions Sn(x) (Fo(x)-Sn(x))]
1 0.0471 0.0509
2 -0.0288
3 -0.0356
4 -0.0509
5 -0.0493
6 -0.0321
7 -0.0209
8 -0.0110
9 -0.0011
Total
K-S
statistics
= 1.63/SQRT(n) - > 0.0863
Table 5: Productivity Index and Level of Contributions of Authors in
IP&M
Productivity Index (PI) No. of % of % of
Authors Authors Contributions
PI = 0 (1 article) 190 48.35 14.69
0 < PI < 1 (2-9 articles) 167 42.49 38.44
PI >= 1 (10 or more articles) 36 9.16 46.87
Productivity Index (PI) Level of contributions
PI = 0 (1 article) Occasional producers
0 < PI < 1 (2-9 articles) Intermediate producers
PI >= 1 (10 or more articles) Larger producers
Table 6: Top ten authors on the basis of download of Articles
SI. Total No.
No. Authors Country of Downloads
1 Bernard J.Jansen USA 55
2 Birger Hjorland Denmark 22
3 Hong Iris Xie USA 22
4 Yuen-Hsian Tseng Taiwan 22
5 J.Bhogal UK 19
6 Marcos Andre Goncalves USA 19
7 Ziming Liu USA 19
8 Giannis Tsakonas Greece 18
9 David Robins USA 18
10 Madhu C. Reddy USA 18
6 Unique
Total countries 232 (42.18%)
h-
SI. No. of Unique index
No. Authors Country Contributions (GS)
1 Bernard J.Jansen USA 7 57
2 Birger Hjorland Denmark 2 43
3 Hong Iris Xie USA 1 24
4 Yuen-Hsian Tseng Taiwan 1 19
5 J.Bhogal UK 1 4
6 Marcos Andre Goncalves USA 1 40
7 Ziming Liu USA 1 21
8 Giannis Tsakonas Greece 1 9
9 David Robins USA 1 --
10 Madhu C. Reddy USA 2 26
6 Unique
Total countries 18
Table 7: Top ten countries of T25-HA
Rank Country No. of T25-HA % of T25-HA
1 USA 236 42.9
2 UK 75 13.6
3 Taiwan 39 7.1
4 Denmark 37 6.7
5 Australia 23 4.2
5 Brazil 23 4.2
6 Greece 21 3.8
7 Spain 14 2.5
8 China 11 2.1
9 Canada 9 1.6
10 Finland 8 1.5
Other 26 countries 54 9.8
36 550 100
Rank Country Level of Contributions
1 USA Larger Producers
2 UK (around 70%)
3 Taiwan
4 Denmark
5 Australia Intermediate Producers
5 Brazil (around 20%)
6 Greece
7 Spain
8 China
9 Canada
10 Finland
Other 26 countries Occasional Producers
(around 10%)
36
Table 8: Top Ten Institutions of T25-HA
Sl. No. of
No. Name of the Institutes Country Downloads
1 School of Information Science and
Technology, Pennsylvania State
University. USA 63
2 Royal School of Library and Information
Science. Denmark 31
3 University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee USA 22
4 National Taiwan Normal University Taiwan 22
5 School of Library and Information
Science, San Jose' State University. USA 19
6 Department of Computing, University of
Central England UK 19
7 Department of Computer Science, Federal
University of Minas Gerais Brazil 19
8 Ionian University Greece 18
9 Kent State University USA 18
10 University of Technology Sydney Australia 16
Table 9: Most preferred research areas of IP&M Top 25-Hottest Articles
(T25-HA)
Sl. Subject Total %
No.
1 Information Needs & Seeking Behaviour 116 21.1
2 Information Retrieval 92 16.7
3 Digital library 63 11.5
4 Knowledge Management (KM) 32 5.8
5 Web search Engine 30 5.5
6 Semantic Web & Web Ontology 30 5.5
7 Text Mining 28 5.1
8 Knowledge Organization 27 4.9
9 Electronic Resources 24 4.4
10 LIS Theory & Practices 23 4.2
11 Social Media & Social Networking 23 4.2
12 Website Design 21 3.8
13 Bibliometrics 15 2.7
14 Information system 10 1.8
15 Sentiment Analysis 3 0.5
... Others (6 areas) 13 2.4
Total 550 100
Sl. Subject Preferred Areas
No.
1 Information Needs & Seeking Behaviour Most preferred
2 Information Retrieval areas (3 areas ~
3 Digital library 50%)
4 Knowledge Management (KM) Moderate preferred
5 Web search Engine areas (10 areas ~
6 Semantic Web & Web Ontology 45%)
7 Text Mining
8 Knowledge Organization
9 Electronic Resources
10 LIS Theory & Practices
11 Social Media & Social Networking
12 Website Design
13 Bibliometrics
14 Information system Least preferred/
15 Sentiment Analysis Upcoming areas (8
... Others (6 areas) areas ~ 5%)
Total
Table 10: Top Ten Articles of IP&M by Number of times downloaded
No. of times
SI. Articles downloaded Rank
1 How are We Searching The World Wide 22 1
Web? A Comparison of Nine Search
Engine Transaction Logs
2 Text Mining Techniques For Patent 22 1
Analysis
3 User's Evaluations of Digital 22 1
Libraries (DLS): Their Criteria,
and Their Assessment
4 Library and Information Science: 20 2
Practice, Theory and Philosophical
Basis
5 A Review of Ontology Based Query 19 3
Expansion
6 Exploring Usefulness & Usability in 18 3
The Evalution of Open Access Digital
Libraries
7 Print VS Electronic Resources: A 19 3
Study of User Perceptions,
Preferences, and use.
8 What is a Good Digital Library"? A 19 3
Quality Model For Digital Libraries
9 Aesthetics and Credibility in 18 4
Website Design
10 Tagging and Searching: Search 12 5
Retrieval Effectiveness of
Folksonomies on The World Wide Web.
SI. Authors & Country
1 Bernard J. Jansen & Amanda
Spink (USA)
2 Yuen-Hsien Tseng, Chi-Jen
Lin, Yu-I Lin, (Taiwan)
3 Hong Iris Xie (USA)
4 Birger Hjorland (Denmark)
5 J. Bhogal, A. Macfarlane
& P. Smith (UK)
6 Giannis Tsakonas, & Christos
Papatheodorou (Greece)
7 Ziming Liu (USA)
8 Marcos A. Goncalves & Barbara
L. Moreira (Brazil); Edward A.
Fox & Layne T. Watson (USA)
9 David Robins, & Jason
Holmes (USA)
10 P. Jason Marrison (USA)
Table 11: Pagination pattern of articles
SI. Page No. of IP&M
No. Length articles %
1 1 to 10 56 10.2
2 11 to 20 294 53.5
3 21 to 30 155 28.2
4 31 to 40 45 8.2
Total 550 100
Table 12: Top 10 Highly Cited Articles
Top Ten Articles on the basis
of number of Citations No. of
Sl. received Citations %
1 Real Life, Real Users and Real 808 4.99
Needs: A Study and Analysis of
User Queries on The Web
2 A Systematic Analysis of 618 3.81
Performance Measures for
Classification Tasks
3 How are We Searching The World 454 2.80
Wide Web? A Comparison of Nine
Search Engine Transaction Logs
4 Text Mining Techniques For 347 2.14
Patent Analysis
5 A Review of Ontology-Based 240 1.48
Query Expansion
6 An Information-Theoretic 238 1.47
Perspective of TF-IDF Measures
7 Determining the Information, 237 1.46
Navigational and Transaction
Intent of Web Queries
8 The Information-Seeking 202 1.25
Practices of Engineer's
Searching For Documents as
Well as for people
9 Task Complexity Problem 188 1.16
Structure and Information
Actions-Integrating Studies on
Information Seeking and
Retrieval
10 User's Criteria For Relevance 172 1.06
Evaluation: a
Cross-Situational Comparison
Rest 144 unique titles 12698 78.4
Top Ten Articles on the basis
of number of Citations
Sl. received Authors & Country
1 Real Life, Real Users and Real Bernard J. Jansen, Amanda
Needs: A Study and Analysis of Spink, & Tefko Saracevic (USA)
User Queries on The Web
2 A Systematic Analysis of Marina Sokolova, & Guy Lapalme
Performance Measures for (Canada,USA)
Classification Tasks
3 How are We Searching The World Bernard J. Jansen & Amanda
Wide Web? A Comparison of Nine Spink (USA)
Search Engine Transaction Logs
4 Text Mining Techniques For Yuen-Hsien Tseng, Chi-jenLin,
Patent Analysis & Yu-I Lin (China)
5 A Review of Ontology-Based J. Bhogal, A. Macfarlane, &
Query Expansion P.smith (UK)
6 An Information-Theoretic Akiko Aizawa (Japan)
Perspective of TF-IDF Measures
7 Determining the Information, Bernard J. Jansen & Danielle
Navigational and Transaction L. Booth (USA); Amanda Spink
Intent of Web Queries (Australia)
8 The Information-Seeking Morten Hertzum & Annelise M.
Practices of Engineer's Pejtersen (Denmark)
Searching For Documents as
Well as for people
9 Task Complexity Problem Pertti Vakkari (Finland)
Structure and Information
Actions-Integrating Studies on
Information Seeking and
Retrieval
10 User's Criteria For Relevance Caroll L. Barry & Linda
Evaluation: a Schamber (USA)
Cross-Situational Comparison
Rest 144 unique titles
Please Note: Illustration(s) are not available due to copyright
restrictions.
COPYRIGHT 2018 University of Idaho Library
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2018 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
