Search results

Analyze patterns of co-authorship in hospitality and tourism (H&T) research using bibliometric methods. The purpose of this paper is to answer three questions related to collaborative practices, the number of authors, the order of signatures and the role of the corresponding author.

The methodology is based on the bibliometric techniques of authorship analyzes published in leading H&T journals. Evaluative techniques provide longitudinal evidence of the evolution of some indicators of authors’ collaboration: the percentage of alphabetized authorships; the percentage of articles were the most relevant author signs in the first, middle or last position; and the position of the corresponding author in the by-line.

First, the collaborative nature of H&T research is confirmed; almost 80% of articles in the sample are co-authored. Second, over the past 30 years, the alphabetized signature model has been in decline in this field. Today, about 20% of articles indexed in JCR journals are signed alphabetically. Third, the first author’s placement is less consistent than that of the corresponding author.

This work provides relevant information on researchers’ authorship habits that may help evaluators assign credit and accountability and avoid malpractice in the authorial assignment.

This study explores the habits of researchers who collaborate to improve their productivity, impact and reputation. This is often linked to facilitating access to research funding and obtaining recognition from incentive systems. Yet, no research specifically examines trends in signature order or the corresponding author’s role in the H&T field.

The present study aims to trace out the science research output of top Indian universities from 2015 to 2019, as reflected in the Web of Science (WOS) database.

The present study has selected the Science Citation Index (SCI) of WOS core collection for selecting top Indian universities in terms of total publications in the last five years (2015–2019). The University of Delhi (DU), Banaras Hindu University (BHU), Anna University (AU), Jadavpur University (JU) and Punjab University (PU) have been selected. The study identified the most prolific authors, collaborating countries, collaborating institutions and the impact of their output in terms of citations per paper (CPP) and relative citation impact (RCI). For visualizing purposes, VOSviewer was used. The study also identified frequently used keywords and channels used for communicating research results.

The authors retrieved 26,173 documents consisting of journal articles, review papers and proceeding papers. The consistent growth of science research output has been observed. The University of Delhi (DU) has the maximum science publications. The study reflects that multi-authored papers have more research impact in terms of citation received. The USA, South Korea and Germany are the most collaborating countries. The top Indian Universities have a major collaboration with Anna University, Indian Institute of Technology, Center for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) of India.

The present study reveals how the science research output of top Indian universities has grown in the last few years. The findings of the study can be used for identifying specific science research areas where special attention can be given.

Research with stem cells is a biomedical venture with great scientific impact, and whose development flows over into many other areas. This article aims to present a dual analysis of Spain's scientific output in this field during the period 1997‐2007.

The authors used bibliometric indicators of a basic nature as well as techniques for the visualization and analysis of networks of scientific information based on a study of KeyWords Plus.

The output is mainly concentrated in Cataluña and Madrid, and hospitals are the most productive centres (followed by health institutes), where the main authors are affiliated. Main categories are hematology, oncology and biophysics. The outstanding areas of study revolve around the therapeutic use of transplant of hematopoietic progenitors, the processes of generation, proliferation and differentiation of lines of cells, and the study of neurosciences.

This study provides an overview of Spanish research involving stem cells, detecting and representing the main areas of research. The article considers the potential of KeyWords Plus in combination with the proposed methodology as particularly useful for the analysis and delimitation of a scientific domain.

In some ways the year that ends with this month—the year covered by the eighteenth volume of The Library World—has been a definitely bibliographical and indexing one. Librarians were never before furnished with so many aids to book‐selection, for example. Hitherto they have depended for exhaustive statements of the literary output of England upon The Publisher's Circular and The Times Literary Supplement, which invaluable aids they will continue to use, and for selective guides they have had recourse to the lists of best books in The Librarian and in The Library Association Record, with auxiliary service from the A.L.A Book List for American books. Now a formidable competitor to all these has arisen in the fully annotated, classified, and comprehensive monthly lists in The Athenæum, which are being published with the co‐operation of The Library Association. These lists, which are classified by Dewey, are in a sound library cataloguing form—and thus are superior to those in The Times Literary Supplement—and have been made selective by the starring of the best books. This work of starring has been undertaken by librarians, and in consequence of the appearance of the lists the Library Association has decided, wisely as we think, to cease publishing its own lists of best books in the L. A. Record. In guides to periodical literature we have the famous Readers' Guide, the excellent monthly issued by the H. W. Wilson Company, which is almost exclusively American—it indexes only eight British periodicals out of a total of ninety‐four—and for special and current use the excellent International Military Digest, issued monthly from New York, which reviews the current literature on military matters. British librarians, however, are most interested in The Athenæum Index to Periodicals, which is appearing under the regis of the Library Association in the form of class lists, which are eventually to be cumulated. It is a most valuable work, but it depends so largely on voluntary effort, and in spite of its merits its value is so little understood by all but advanced librarians, that we are apprehensive as to its continued existence. Bibliographers of the Great War, notably Lange and Berry, have proved of considerable service. For all these bibliographical tools, which mean much help, but also much ill‐paid labour on the part of compilers and publishers, librarians cannot be too grateful. And they cannot show that gratitude better than by supporting and using them systematically.

The purpose of this paper is to know whether the authors’ productivity pattern of library and information science (LIS) open access journals adheres to Lotka’s inverse square law of scientific productivity. Since the law was introduced, it has been tested in various fields of knowledge, and results have varied. This study has closely followed Lotka’s inverse square law in the field of LIS open access journals to find a factual result and set a baseline for future studies on author productivity of LIS open access journals.

The publication data of selected ten LIS open access journals pertain to authorship, citations were downloaded from the Scopus database and analysed using bibliometric indicators like authorship pattern, collaborative index (CI), degree of collaboration (DC), collaborative coefficient (CC) and citation counts. This study has applied Lotka’s inverse square law to assess authors’ productivity pattern of LIS open access journals and further Kolmogorov-Smirnov (K-S) goodness-of-fit test applied for testing of observed and expected author productivity data.

Inferences were drawn for the set objectives on authorship pattern, collaboration trend and authors’ productivity pattern of LIS open access journals covered in this study. The single authorship pattern is dominant in LIS open access journals covered in this study. The CI, DC and CC are found to be 1.95, 0.47 and 0.29, respectively. The expected values as per Lotka’s law (n = −2) significantly vary from the observed values as per the chi-square test and K-S goodness-of-fit test. Hence, this study does not adhere to Lotka’s inverse square law of scientific productivity.

Researchers may find an idea about the authors’ productivity patterns of LIS open access journals. This study has used the K-S goodness-of-fit test and the chi-square test to validate the authors’ productivity data. The inferences found out from this study will be a baseline for future research on author productivity of LIS open access journals.

This study is significant from the viewpoint of the growing research on open access journals in the field of LIS and to identify the authorship pattern, collaboration trend and author productivity pattern of such journals.

This study introduces a new approach, called the social structure approach, for ranking academic journals by focusing on hospitality and tourism journals; and a hybrid metric, including the combination of the journal impact factor via citations and a social network metric, called the journal knowledge domain index (JKDI).

Twenty-five hospitality and tourism journals were selected to test this approach. Collaboration-based metrics, productivity-based metrics, and network-based metrics are considered components of the social structure approach. Additionally, a hybrid metric, including the combination of the journal impact factor via citations and a social network metric, JKDI, is developed.

The study’s findings show that top or leading journals have a weaker position in some social structure approach metrics compared to other (or follower) journals. However, according to the JKDI, leading journals have remained constant with the other ranking studies.

The ranking of academic journals is vital for the stakeholders of academia. Consequently, the findings of this study may help stakeholders to design an optimal ranking system and formulate and implement effective research strategies for knowledge creation and dissemination.

As one of the first in the journal-ranking literature, this study has significant implications, as it introduces a new ranking approach.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the authorship patterns and the relationship between them based on some statistical indices for the role of libraries in promoting education at the global level.

The Education Resources Information Center (ERIC) database was searched for the peer-reviewed and full text available journal articles that contained specific words related to either libraries and education or libraries and e-learning in. Data were analysed based on certain statistical calculations to find out the degree of collaboration, collaborative coefficient, Shannon index, Simpson’s indices, Spearman’s coefficient and co-authorship pattern.

The criteria were met by 262 publications by 517 authors. The highest number of articles related with the role of libraries in education was published in the year 2013, and the highest numbers of articles were authored by a single author rather than multiple authors. The degree of collaboration was found to be highest in the year 2015 and 2016 with a value of 0.66, whereas the collaborative coefficient was highest in the year 2016 with a value 0.42. The Shannon’s diversity index was found to be 2.73705 with an evenness of 1.24568. The Simpson’s index, Simpson’s index of diversity and Simpson’s reciprocal index were found to be 0.299, 0.701 and 3.3444, respectively. The Spearman’s coefficient was found to be highest with a positive correlation of value 0.95 in the year 2013. Furthermore, six co-occurrences by eight authors were found.

Only the ERIC database was chosen for the study and only articles published from the year 2012 to 2016 were included in the analysis.

This study will be useful for researchers to get an insight into the collaborative research patterns demonstrated by the authors in understanding the role of libraries in education using different statistical approaches.

Science is subject to a normative structure that includes how the contributions and interactions between scientists are rewarded. Authorship and citations have been the key elements within the reward system of science, whereas acknowledgements, despite being a well-established element in scholarly communication, have not received the same attention. The purpose of this paper is to put forward the bearing of acknowledgements in the humanities to bring to the foreground contributions and interactions that, otherwise, would remain invisible through traditional indicators of research performance.

The study provides a comprehensive framework to understanding acknowledgements as part of the reward system with a special focus on their value in the humanities as a reflection of intellectual indebtedness. The distinctive features of research in the humanities are outlined and the role of acknowledgements as a source of contributorship information is reviewed to support these assumptions.

“Peer interactive communication” is the prevailing support thanked in the acknowledgements of humanities, so the notion of acknowledgements as “super-citations” can make special sense in this area. Since single-authored papers still predominate as publishing pattern in this domain, the study of acknowledgements might help to understand social interactions and intellectual influences that lie behind a piece of research and are not visible through authorship.

Previous works have proposed and explored the prevailing acknowledgement types by domain. This paper focusses on the humanities to show the role of acknowledgements within the reward system and highlight publication patterns and inherent research features which make acknowledgements particularly interesting in the area as a reflection of the socio-cognitive structure of research.

Scholars in major us research universities were surveyed to explore the normative bases of acknowledgement behaviour. Measures of agreement and divergence were established in respect of five issue sets pertaining to acknowledgement practice: expectations, etiquette, ethics, equity and evaluation. The results confirm the substantive role played by acknowledgements in the primary communication process. Although few formal rules exist, it is clear that many scholars subscribe to the idea of a governing etiquette. The findings also suggest that acknowledgement data could be mined to lay bare the rules of engagement that define the dynamics of collaboration and inter‐dependence among scholars.

The purpose of this paper is to identify the top researchers in information behaviour (IB) based on ideational and social influence indicators.

The population included papers on IB indexed in the Web of Science from 1980 to 2015. UCINET and Bibexcel were the tools used for measuring the ideational and social influence indicators. The correlations among the study variables were measured by applying SPSS and LISREL.

There was a significant relationship between IB researchers’ productivity and performance, and between ideational influence and social influence. The structural equation modelling showed that a researcher with top placement in his/her co-authorship network can gain higher ideational influence. In total, it seems that the single and traditional criteria are increasingly replacing new and integrative ones in measuring researchers’ scientific influence in fields including IB studies. Results have shown that based on total scores of the studied indicators, Spink, A., Nicholas, D., Ford, N., Huntington, P., Wilson, T.D., and Jamali, H.R. gained the high scores.

The current study used an integrative method based on influence indicators to identify the influential researchers in IB studies. None of the few studies done using bibliometric methods in the realm of IB has investigated the ideational and social influence indicators altogether.