A CITATION ANALYSIS OF LIS SERIAL LITERATURE PUBLISHED IN DENMARK 1957–1986
| Date | 01 January 1996 |
| Pages | 69-85 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/eb026962 |
| Published date | 01 January 1996 |
| Author | LEIF KAJBERG |
| Subject Matter | Information & knowledge management,Library & information science |
A CITATION ANALYSIS OF LIS SERIAL LITERATURE PUBLISHED
IN DENMARK 1957-1986
LEIF KAJBERG
lk@db.dk
The Royal School of Librarianship, 6 Birketinget,
DK-2300
Copenhagen
S., Denmark
The focus of the citation analysis reported is the information
exchange between the Danish library-information profession and
LIS
communities in other countries. Consideration is given to the
diff-
usion of ideas and innovations from foreign countries into the Danish
LIS
world. Citation evidence is also used to shed light on structural
characteristics of the LIS periodical literature and other commu-
nication media and some of the communication patterns charac-
terising the
LIS
field in Denmark. The raw material for the citation
analysis was gathered by the manual citation counting method and
not drawn from computerised citation databases. The fact that a
surprisingly large proportion of the references cited by Danish
LIS
authors belong to the so-called 'hidden' category - denoting cited
references embedded in the text of journal papers - is noted as a key
finding. The observation on the considerable number of 'hidden'
citations is developed further. Journals and books (monographs) are
the publication formats most frequently relied on by
LIS
authors. It
was found that the majority of the citations are to relatively recent
materials. Next to Danish material, publications in English and
produced in the United States and in Great Britain are those most
heavily relied on by the Danish
LIS
community. Ranking of journals
by number of citations shows that a very small number of journals
accounts for the majority of journal citations. On the whole, the
works cited point to a definite interest in public libraries and issues
relating to the planning, structure and legislation of public libraries.
Works on research and academic libraries and on theoretical aspects
of
LIS
did not attract the same amount of citations.
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
THE PRESENT STUDY uses citation analysis to investigate characteristics of
the discipline of library and information science
(LIS)
in Denmark during the
period 1957 to 1986. 1957 was chosen as the starting year for the analysis as
this year marks the implementation of new library education programmes at the
Royal School of Librarianship in Copenhagen. It could reasonably be expected
that the setting up of a recognised national centre for library education - itself
a milestone in the history of the Danish library profession - would stimulate
Journal
of
Documentation,
vol. 52, no. 1, March 1996, pp. 69-85
69
JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION vol. 52, no. 1
professional communication, scholarship, research work and writing for publi-
cation in the library field in subsequent decades.
The research reported here considers the knowledge base of the
LIS
profession
in Denmark during a specific period and focuses on factors influencing the
exchange of information within the Danish
LIS
sector. Further, the interaction
between the Danish
LIS
world and research fronts, professional communities,
networks and specific phenomena reported in other countries is examined. Also
explored are formal properties of the
LIS
periodical literature. In presenting and
discussing the results of the study, special consideration will be given to the key
finding that a surprisingly large proportion of the references cited by Danish
LIS
authors belong to the so-called 'hidden' category. 'Hidden' references denote
cited references embedded in the text of journal papers.
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
Two recent review articles deserve mention in this context. The first one by Baird
and Oppenheim addresses the applications of citation analysis [1]. The authors
state that studies of this kind can, for example, be used to identify facets and
milestones of the history of a subject field. Even hot topics can be identified.
Baird and Oppenheim conclude that: 'citation studies remain a valid method of
analysis of individuals', institutions' or journals' impact, but need to be used
with caution and in conjunction with other measures' [1, p. 2].
In the other article Liu reviews a significant number of completed citation
studies
[2].
The main focus is the citation process and its complexities and special
attention is devoted to citation motivations and citation functions.
The applications of citation analysis to LIS are manifold; citations have
for instance been counted for the purpose of ranking or evaluating authors or
journals, for assessing the development and state of the art of a
LIS
subfield
or for measuring the intellectual maturity of
LIS
as a discipline. Indeed the
number of articles reporting citation studies in the LIS field is quite impressive.
There is a wide range of citation studies exploring the nature of published LIS
research or examining other characteristics of the literature including Peritz'
1981 paper which focuses on citation characteristics of
LIS
research literature
[3].
A distinctive feature of published citation analyses applied to
LIS
professional
literature is the neglect of the subfield of public librarianship, an aspect pointed
out by Schrader and Beswick in their description of a study of key bibliometric
patterns and trends in the articles published by the journal Public Library
Quarterly [4, p. 5]. One of the very few bibliometric studies of public library
literature was conducted by Budd who investigated a population of public library
materials derived from the ERIC database [5].
There is an array of single-journal bibliometric investigations similar to
Schrader and Beswick's study including an investigation by Schrader himself
covering the Journal of Education/or
Librarianship
(JEL) [6] and Kim and Kim's
study of College & Research Libraries [7]. Selected bibliometric characteristics
of
College
& Research Libraries were also examined by Cline [8] and Metz [9].
Smiraglia and Leazer did an empirical assessment of the contents of Library
70
To continue reading
Request your trial