Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Non-synchronism in global usage of research methods in library and information science from 1990 to 2019

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The global development of Library and Information Science (LIS) is influenced by various factors such as the economy, society, culture, discipline, tradition, and more. Consequently, the research methods of LIS vary greatly among countries. To better understand these differences, we conducted a study of 5281 research papers from 81 countries published in internationally representative journals over the past thirty years. We manually annotated the research methods used in some articles through content analysis, and subsequently developed and trained a deep learning model for automatic classification of research methods. Using this method, we conducted a comparative analysis of the usage of research methods in different countries. Our findings reveal that there are differences in the research methods used across countries, with each country having its unique research profile and distribution of research methods. Even when investigating the same topic, research methods can differ between countries. Our study also uncovers that there are differences between the national and international distribution of research methods, these differences have decreased over the past 30 years. By highlighting the characteristics of discipline development in various countries from the perspective of research methods, our study can help guide discipline development at the national level. This study provides insights into the usage trends of research methods across different countries and highlights the unique characteristics of discipline development in each country. This information can be valuable in promoting collaboration and understanding between countries and in guiding discipline development at the national level.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Angelov, D. (2020). Top2Vec: Distributed representations of topics. ArXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2008.09470

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beltagy, I., Lo, K., & Cohan, A. (2019). SciBERT: A Pretrained Language Model for Scientific Text. Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and the 9th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (EMNLP-IJCNLP), 3615–3620. https://aclanthology.org/D19-1371

  • Berndt, D. J., & Clifford, J. (1994). Using dynamic time warping to find patterns in time series. KDD Workshop, 10(16), 359–370.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bholowalia, P., & Kumar, A. (2014). EBK-means: A clustering technique based on elbow method and k-means in WSN. International Journal of Computer Applications, 105(9).

  • Blake, V. L. (1994). Since shaughnessy: Research methods in library and information science dissertation, 1975–1989. Collection Management, 19(1–2), 1–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cano, V. (1999). Bibliometric overview of library and information science research in Spain. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(8), 675–680.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carbonell, J., & Goldstein, J. (1998). The use of MMR, diversity-based reranking for reordering documents and producing summaries. Proceedings of the 21st Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, 335–336.

  • Cheng, H. (1996). A bibliometric study of library and information research in China. Asian Libraries, 5, 30–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chu, H. (2015). Research methods in library and information science: A content analysis. Library & Information Science Research, 37(1), 36–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2014.09.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chu, H., & Ke, Q. (2017). Research methods: What’s in the name? Library & Information Science Research, 39(4), 284–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2017.11.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Danielsson, P.-E. (1980). Euclidean distance mapping. Computer Graphics and Image Processing, 14(3), 227–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ding, M., Zhou, C., Yang, H., & Tang, J. (2020). Cogltx: Applying bert to long texts. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 33, 12792–12804.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eckle-Kohler, J., Nghiem, T.-D., & Gurevych, I. (2013). Automatically assigning research methods to journal articles in the domain of social sciences. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 50, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/meet.14505001049

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fidel, R. (2008). Are we there yet?: Mixed methods research in library and information science. Library & Information Science Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2008.04.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granikov, V., Hong, Q. N., Crist, E., & Pluye, P. (2020). Mixed methods research in library and information science: A methodological review. Library & Information Science Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2020.101003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hider, P., & Pymm, B. (2008). Empirical research methods reported in high-profile LIS journal literature. Library & Information Science Research, 30(2), 108–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2007.11.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hjørland, B. (2005). Empiricism, rationalism and positivism in library and information science. Journal of Documentation. https://doi.org/10.1108/00220410510578050

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Järvelin, K., & Vakkari, P. (1990). Content analysis of research articles in library and information science. Library and Information Science Research, 12(4), 395–421.

    Google Scholar 

  • Järvelin, K., & Vakkari, P. (1993). The evolution of library and information science 1965–1985: A content analysis of journal articles. Information Processing & Management, 29(1), 129–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/0306-4573(93)90028-C

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, S. C. (1967). Hierarchical clustering schemes. Psychometrika, 32(3), 241–254.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kingma, D. P., & Ba, J. (2014). Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. ArXiv Preprint. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1412.6980

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lou, W., Su, Z., He, J., & Li, K. (2021). A temporally dynamic examination of research method usage in the Chinese library and information science community. Information Processing & Management. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2021.102686

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lund, B. D. (2020). Review of the Delphi method in library and information science research. Journal of Documentation, 76(4), 929–960. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-09-2019-0178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lund, B. D., & Wang, T. (2021). An analysis of research methods utilized in five top, practitioner-oriented LIS journals from 1980 to 2019. Journal of Documentation, 77(5), 1196–1208. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-10-2020-0171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ma, J., & Lund, B. (2021). The evolution and shift of research topics and methods in library and information science. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24474

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McInnes, L., Healy, J., Saul, N., & Grossberger, L. (2018). UMAP: Uniform manifold approximation and projection. The Journal of Open Source Software, 3(29), 861.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Menéndez, M., Pardo, J., Pardo, L., & Pardo, M. (1997). The jensen-shannon divergence. Journal of the Franklin Institute, 334(2), 307–318.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Mihalcea, R., & Tarau, P. (2004). Textrank: Bringing order into text. Proceedings of the 2004 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing (EMNLP) (pp. 404–411).

  • Ngulube, P., & Ukwoma, S. C. (2021). Prevalence of methodological transparency in the use of mixed methods research in library and information science research in South Africa and Nigeria, 2009–2015. Library & Information Science Research, 43(4), 101124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Northcutt, C., Jiang, L., & Chuang, I. (2021). Confident learning: estimating uncertainty in dataset labels. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 70, 1373–1411. https://doi.org/10.1613/jair.1.12125

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Riedl, R., & Rueckel, D. (2011). Historical Development of Research Methods in the Information Systems Discipline. 15.

  • Rochester, M. K. (1995). Library and information science research in Australia 1985–1994: A content analysis of research articles in the Australian library journal and Australian academic & research libraries. Australian Academic & Research Libraries, 26(3), 163–170. https://doi.org/10.1080/00048623.1995.10754930

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rochester, M., & Vakkari, P. (1998). International LIS research: A comparison of national trends. IFLA Journal, 24(3), 166–175. https://doi.org/10.1177/034003529802400305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlatcher, G. A., & Thomison, D. (1974). Library Science Dissertations, 1925–1972: An Annotated Bibliography. Littleton: Libraries Unlimited.

  • Spellerberg, I. F., & Fedor, P. J. (2003). A tribute to Claude Shannon (1916–2001) and a plea for more rigorous use of species richness, species diversity and the ‘Shannon–Wiener’Index. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 12(3), 177–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinerová, J. (2003). Information science research agenda in Slovakia: History and emerging vision. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(1), 81–86. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.10157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trotman, A., Puurula, A., & Burgess, B. (2014). Improvements to BM25 and Language Models Examined, Proceedings of the 2014 Australasian Document Computing Symposium on - ADCS ’14, 58–65. https://doi.org/10.1145/2682862.2682863

  • Tuomaala, O., Järvelin, K., & Vakkari, P. (2014). Evolution of library and information science, 1965–2005: Content analysis of journal articles. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(7), 1446–1462. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23034

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ullah, A., & Ameen, K. (2018). Account of methodologies and methods applied in LIS research: A systematic review. Library & Information Science Research, 40(1), 53–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2018.03.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ullah, A., & Ameen, K. (2021). Statistical analysis used in LIS research produced by Pakistani authors. Online Information Review, Ahead-of-Print (ahead-of-Print). https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-02-2021-0092

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, F., & Wang, X. (2020). Tracing theory diffusion: A text mining and citation-based analysis of TAM. Journal of Documentation, 76(6), 1109–1134. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-02-2020-0023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward, P. L. (1997). The nature of UK research literature: Some thoughts arising from a bibliometric study. Information Storage and Retrieval, 10(20), 21–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weller, T., & Haider, J. (2007). Where do we go from here? An opinion on the future of LIS as an academic discipline in the UK. Aslib Proceedings. https://doi.org/10.1108/00012530710817654

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wong, M. A., & Hartigan, J. (1979). Algorithm as 136: A k-means clustering algorithm. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C (applied Statistics), 28(1), 100–108.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Xie, I., Wang, S., & Saba, M. (2021). Studies on blind and visually impaired users in LIS literature: A review of research methods. Library & Information Science Research, 43(3), 101109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2021.101109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yontar, A., & Yalvaç, M. (2000). Problems of library and information science research in Turkey: A content analysis of journal articles 1952–1994. IFLA Journal, 26(1), 39–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, C., Tian, L., & Chu, H. (2021a). Usage Frequency and Application Variety of Research Methods in Library and Information Science: An Exploration with the Machine Learning Approach. Unpublished Manuscript.

  • Zhang, M.-L., & Zhou, Z.-H. (2014). A review on multi-label learning algorithms. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 26(8), 1819–1837. https://doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2013.39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Z., Tam, W., & Cox, A. (2021b). Towards automated analysis of research methods in library and information science. Quantitative Science Studies, 2(2), 698–732. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Z., Tam, W., & Tam, A. (2021c). Towards automated analysis of research methods in library and information science. Quantitative Science Studies. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00123

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 72074113). Thanks are due to Prof. Heting Chu for her valuable suggestions on this study.

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China, 72074113, Chengzhi Zhang

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Information Management, Nanjing University of Science and Technology, Nanjing, 210094, China

    Chengzhi Zhang & Liang Tian

Authors
  1. Chengzhi Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Liang Tian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chengzhi Zhang.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhang, C., Tian, L. Non-synchronism in global usage of research methods in library and information science from 1990 to 2019. Scientometrics 128, 3981–4006 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-023-04740-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-023-04740-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation