Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.1633/JISTaP.2017.5.2.4

Research Output of the Pakistani Library and Information Science Authors: A Bibliometric Evaluation of Their Impact  

Anwar, Mumtaz Ali (University of the Punjab)
Jan, Sajjad Ullah (Govt. Degree College Chaghar Matti)
Publication Information
Journal of Information Science Theory and Practice / v.5, no.2, 2017 , pp. 48-61 More about this Journal
Abstract
This paper uses 601 cited papers of Pakistani LIS researchers with the purpose to examine the individual performance of these Library and Information Science (LIS) researchers in terms of their research output and its impact on the LIS (national/international) literature by using various bibliometric indicators. A list of 139 authors was compiled with the help of the Library, Information Science, and Technology Abstracts (LISTA) and some other sources. Data were collected from Google Scholar and SPSS version 20 was utilized in order to identify the relationship between self-citations and various performance indices of the authors. The average citations received per paper vary from 1.80 to 10.08. About half of the papers were single-authored whereas less than one-fifth were by three or more authors. The authors who worked in collaboration produced more papers and received more citations. The h-index, g-index, hI-index, hI-norm, and e-index were used to determine the rank for each author. The intra-group citations grid revealed the volume of self-citations and a small group who cite each other more due to close academic and social relationships. The correlations between self-citations and the impact indices used revealed significant differences. Findings are useful for concerned institutions regarding award, promotions, etc. Further, future research should seriously consider the self-citations and social networking of authors while examining their citations-based research performance.
Keywords
Citation analysis; Library and Information Science; Pakistani authors; Research impact; Self citations;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Khey, D. N., Jennings, W. G., Higgins, G. E., Shoepfer, A., & Langton, L. (2011). Re-ranking the top female academic “Stars” in criminology and criminal justice using an alternative method: A research note. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 22(1), 118-129.   DOI
2 Khurshid, Z. (2013). Contribution of Pakistani authors to foreign library and information science journals: An evaluative study. Aslib Proceedings, 65(4), 441-460.   DOI
3 Lee, S., & Bozeman, B. (2005). The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity. Social Studies of Science, 35(5), 673-702.   DOI
4 Long, H., Boggess, L. N., & Jennings, W. G. (2011). Re-Assessing publication productivity among academic "stars" in criminology and criminal justice. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 22(1), 102-117.   DOI
5 Macri, J., & Sinha, D. (2006). Rankings methodology for international comparisons of institutions and individuals: An application to economics in Australia and New Zealand. Journal of Economic Surveys, 20(1), 111-156.   DOI
6 Mahmood, K., & Rehman, S. U. (2009). Contributions of Dr. Anis Khurshid to library literature: A bibliometric study. Pakistan Journal of Library & Information Science, 10, 43-56.
7 McCallum, M. L. (2010). Characterizing author citation ratings of herpetologists using Harzing’s Publish or Perish. Herpetology Notes, 3, 239-245.
8 McKercher, B. (2008). A citation analysis of tourism scholars. Tourism Management, 29(6), 1226-1232.   DOI
9 Meho, L. I., & Yang, K. (2007). Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of Science versus Scopus, and Google Scholar. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 5, 1-21.
10 Minasny, B., Hartemink, A. E., McBratney, A., & Jang, H.-J. (2013). Citations and the h index of soil researchers and journals in the Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar. PeerJ 1:e183; DOI 10.7717/peerj.183.   DOI
11 Qayyum, M., & Naseer, M. M. (2013). Bio-bibliometric study of Dr. Khalid Mahmood's contributions to LIS field in Pakistan. Library Philosophy and Practice, paper no. 900.
12 Saad, G. (2006). Exploring the h-index at the author and journal levels using bibliometric data of productive consumer scholars and business-related journals respectively. Scientometrics, 69(1), 117-120.   DOI
13 Razzaque, M. A., & Wilkinson, I. F. (2007). Research performance of senior level marketing academics in the Australian universities: An Exploratory Study Based on Citation Analysis. Paper Presented at Australia New Zealand Marketing Academy Conference (ANZMAC), University of Otago, New Zealand, December 1-3.
14 Repanovici, A. (2011). Measuring the visibility of the university’s scientific production through scientometric methods: an exploratory study at the Transilvania University of Brasov, Romania. Performance Measurement and Metrics, 12(2), 106-117.   DOI
15 Rizwan, M. M., & Saadullah, M. (2009). Impactomania. Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association, 59(6), 424.
16 Sabzwari, G. A. (2015). Intellectual honesty and professional integrity (editorial). Pakistan Library & Information Science Journal, 46(2), 1-2.
17 Sandstrom, U., & Sandstrom, E. (2009). Meeting the micro-level challenges: Bibliometrics at the individual level. In 12th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics (pp. 845-56). Rio de Janeiro: BIEREME/PAHO/WHO.
18 Schreiber, M. (2008). The influence of self-citation corrections on Egghe’s g index. Scientometrics, 76(1), 187-200.   DOI
19 Shah, T. A., Gul, S., & Gaur, R. C. (2015). Authors self-citation behaviour in the field of Library and Information Science. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 67(4), 458-468.   DOI
20 Shadbolt, N., Brody, T., & Carr, L. H. S. (2006). The open research web: A preview of the optimal and the inevitable. In N. Jacobs (Ed.), Open access: Key strategic, technical and economic aspects (pp. 195-208). Oxford: Chandos.
21 Sidiropoulos, A., Katsaros, D., & Manolopoulos, Y. (2007). Generalized Hirsch h-index for disclosing latent facts in citation networks. Scientometrics, 72(2), 253-280.   DOI
22 Sife, A. S., & Lwoga, E. T. (2014). Publication productivity and scholarly impact of academic librarians in Tanzania: A scientometric analysis. New Library World, 115(11/12), 527-541.   DOI
23 Singh, N. (2009). Influence of information technology in growth and publication of Indian LIS literature. Libri, 59(1), 55-67.
24 Swain, D. K. (2011). Library Philosophy and Practice, 2004-2009: A scientometric appraisal. Library Philosophy and Practice, paper no. 556, 1-18.
25 Snyder, H., & Bonzi, S. (1998). Patterns of self-citation across disciplines. Journal of Information Science, 24, 431-435.
26 Weingart, P. (2005). Impact of bibliometrics upon the science system: inadvertent consequences. Scientometrics, 62(1), 117-131.   DOI
27 White, H. D. (2001). Authors as citers over time. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 52(2), 87-108.   DOI
28 Yazit, N., & Zainab, A. N. (2007). Publication productivity of Malaysian authors and institutions in LIS. Malaysian Journal of Library and Information Science, 12(2), 35-55.
29 Zhang, C.-T. (2009). The e-Index, complementing the h-Index for excess citations. PLoS One, 5(5), e5429.
30 Adam, D. (2002). The counting house. Nature, 415, 726-729.   DOI
31 Aksnes, D. W. (2003). A macro-study of self-citations. Scientometrics, 56(2), 235-246.   DOI
32 Ali, M. Y., & Richardson, J. (2016). Research publishing by library and information science scholars in Pakistan: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Information Science Theory & Practice, 4(1), 6-20.   DOI
33 Anees, M. A., & Iraj, M. (2015). Impact factor, fad or fallacy? The Nation, July 24, 2015, retrieved from http://nation.com.pk/blog/24-Jul-2015/impact-factor-fad-or-fallacy.
34 Anwar, M. A., & Saeed, H. (1999). Pakistani librarians as authors; A bibliometric study of citations in LISA-PLUS. Asian Libraries, 8(2), 39-46.   DOI
35 Bashir, M. (2013). Bibliometric study of Pakistan’s research output and comparison with other selected countries of the world. Asian Journal of Science and Technology, 4(5), 1-7.
36 Atanassov, V., & Detcheva, E. (2014). Self-citation effect on scientometric indexes. International Journal of Information Models and Analysis, 3(1), 68-83.
37 Bar-Ilan, J. (2008). Which h-index? - A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics, 74(2), 257-271.   DOI
38 Bartneck, C., & Kokkelmans, S. (2011). Detecting h -index manipulation through self-citation analysis. Scientometrics, 87, 85-98.   DOI
39 Batista, P. D., Campiteli, M. G., Kinouchi, O, & Martinez, A. S. (2006). Is it possible to compare researchers with different scientific interests? Scientometrics, 68(1), 179-189.   DOI
40 Bhatti, R. (2008). Information needs of students - Islamic University Library, Bahawalpur. Pakistan Library & Information Science Journal, 39(3), 6-21.
41 Borgman, C. L., & Furner, J. (2002). Scholarly communication and bibliometrics. In B. Cronin (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (pp. 3-72). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
42 Bornmann, L., Mutz, R., Neuhaus, C., & Daniel, H.-D. (2008). Citation counts for research evaluation: Standards of good practice for analyzing bibliometric data and presenting and interpreting result. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, 8, 93-102.   DOI
43 Costas, R., & Bordons, M. (2005). Bibliometric indicators at the micro-level: Some results in the area of natural resources at the Spanish CSIC. Research Evaluation, 14(2), 110-120.   DOI
44 Cronin, B., & Meho, L. I. (2006). Using the h-index to rank influential information scientists. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(9), 1275-1278.   DOI
45 Costas, R., Van Leeuwen, T. N., & Bordons, M. (2010). A bibliometric classificatory approach for the study and assessment of research performance at the individual level: The effect of age on productivity and impact. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(8), 1564-1581.   DOI
46 Couto, F. M., Pesquita, C., Grego, T., & Verissimo, P. (2009). Handling self-citations using Google Scholar. Cybermetrics, 13(1), 1-7.
47 Cronin, B. (2005). Warm bodies, cold facts: The embodiment and emplacement of knowledge claims. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, 2005, Stockholm (pp. 1-12). Karolinska University Press.
48 Egghe, L. (2006). Theory and practice of the g-index. Scientometrics, 69(1), 131-152.   DOI
49 Harzing, A.-W. K. (2013). A preliminary test of Google Scholar as a source for citation data: A longitudinal study of Nobel Prize winners. Scientometrics, 93(3), 1057-1075.
50 Harzing, A.-W. K. (2007). Publish or Perish. Retrieved from http://www.harzing.com/pop.htm.
51 Harzing, A.-W. K., & Alakangas, S. (2016). Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: A longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison. Scientometrics, 106(2), 787-804.   DOI
52 Harzing, A.-W. K., & Wal, R. van der (2009). A Google Scholar h-index for journals: An alternative metric to measure journal impact in economics and business. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(1), 41-46.   DOI
53 Harzing, A.-W. K., & Wal, R. van der (2008). Google Scholar as a new source for citation analysis. Ethics in Science and environmental Politics, 8, 61-73.   DOI
54 Jacso, P. (2009). Calculating the h-index and other bibliometric and scientometric indicators from Google scholar with the Publish or Perish software. Online Information Review, 33(6), 1189-1200.   DOI
55 Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(46), 16569-16572.   DOI
56 Hussain, A., & Fatima, N. (2010). A bibliometric analysis of the Chinese librarianship: An international electronic journal (2006-2010). Chinese Librarianship: An International Electronic Journal, 31(2), 1-14.
57 Hyland, K. (2003). Self-citation and self-reference: Credibility and promotion in academic publication. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54, 251-259.   DOI
58 Jan, S. U., & Anwar, M. A. (2013). Impact of Pakistani authors in the Google world: A study of library and information science faculty. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal), Paper no. 980.
59 Harzing, A.-W. K. (2014). A longitudinal study of Google Scholar coverage between 2012 and 2013. Scientometrics, 98(1), 565-575.   DOI