A Content Analysis of Librarianship Research

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Objective: To conduct a content analysis of library and information studies (LIS) literature published in 2001 and test the domains developed by Crumley and Koufogiannakis. Methods: A comprehensive list of refereed library and information studies journals was compiled and reviewed independently by two researchers to derive a list of included journals. Articles published in 2001 from included journals were independently assessed for relevancy by two researchers. Researchers separately extracted and checked data from included articles. Results: 217 LIS journals were reviewed and 107 were included; 91 journals provided data. 2664 journal articles were examined, with 807 (30.3%) classified as research. The Top 10 journals for research published in 2001 were: 1) JASIST, 2) Scientometrics, 3) Info Proc & Man; 4) Coll & Res Lib, 5) Tie: J Lib Adm/Bull Med Lib Assn, 7) Libs & Culture, 8) J Doc, 9) Tie: J Info Sci/J Acad Libr. For the period studied, descriptive research (329 out of 807 articles) was published far more frequently than any other type. The domain Information Access & Retrieval had the highest number of research articles (314/807), followed by Collections (193/807), Management (135/807), Education (95/807) and Reference (77/807). Two new possible domains were identified: Library History and Professional Issues. Conclusions: Because 36 articles fell into the domain of Professional Issues, a case can be made to add this domain to Crumley and Koufogiannakis’ taxonomy. Library History was not added as a domain because historical research is not used for evidence-based decision-making. There was no evidence to support keeping the Marketing & Promotion domain. LISA provides the best coverage of the top 10 LIS research journals identified in this study.