Search results

The purpose of the research was to find out if there are any differences in the readability score between abstracts published in scientific journals from library and information science with and without an impact factor. Therefore, the author made a comparison between the readability of abstracts from one journal with (Journal of Documentation) and one journal without (Knjižnica or Library) an impact factor.

As a measure of readability, the Flesch Reading Ease Readability Formula was used. Then, with the help of statistical experts, a comparison of the readability scores between the abstracts of two selected journals was performed.

The results showed that some statistically important differences exist between the abstracts published in the Journal of Documentation and Knjižnica. The statistically important differences were found in the number of words and sentences in abstracts and in the readability of abstracts included in the research. Therefore, it can be said that there exists a statistically important difference between abstracts with and without an impact factor.

The primary purpose was to find out whether there is a statistically important difference in the readability score of abstracts with and without an impact factor in the field of library and information science. Some similar research studies have been conducted in other scientific fields.

Publishers of some scientific journals and the ISO standard require or recommend specific information to be present in abstracts. However, little is known whether this is what scientists give when they write abstracts. The aim of this paper is to test the structure of abstracts in Czech, Slovenian and international scientific journals in the English language in the areas of library and information science (IS) and materials science (MS).

A total of 100 research paper abstracts were selected from each journal, and content analysis was performed both manually and using Weft QDA qualitative analysis software.

The results show that neither the ISO nor the Emerald structure is entirely appropriate. Abstracts in IS usually have the following structure: Ikaros (CZ): background, purpose of the research project; Knjižnica (SI): background, results only indicated; Journal of Documentation: results, methods, and purpose. In MS, the abstracts usually report on the following. Czech MS journals: background, methods, results; Materiali in Tehnologije (SI): methods, background; Materials Science and Technology (international): methods, results. The differences can in part be attributed to the varying disciplines and to the different roles of journals in professional societies and to cultural differences in perception regarding the role of abstracts.

It seems that purpose and results are usual for information science, while methods and results are more frequent for materials science.

This relatively small sample gives the first insight into the culture of writing abstracts in smaller research communities.

The purpose of this study was to examine whether the logical structure of abstracts in the areas of materials science and technology and library and information science comply with the ISO 214 or IMRAD formats, while also suggesting guidelines for components of abstracts.

In the first part of the research the components of abstracts are analysed. The results showed that not all the proposed structural elements are present in the abstracts. Therefore also the improved prototypes and recommended abstracts are developed to examine the satisfaction of readers with different forms of abstracts. According to the results of satisfaction of readers with different forms of abstracts, uniform guidelines for the components of abstracts in accordance with the IMRAD format are proposed.

The introduction (I) should include three sentences of background information. The method (M) should include three sentences of method. The results (R) should include three sentences of results. The discussion (D) should include two sentences of conclusions. The conclusions should present the implications of the results on subjects that were not part of the study, suggestions for possible application of the findings, suggestions for further research work and an evaluation of the research.

It is important to emphasize that even if the guidelines for writing abstracts by the individual journal exist, authors do not always take them into account. Therefore, it is important that the abstracts that are actually published in journals were analysed. It is also important that the opinion of researchers was taken into account.