Examining the Classification Problem of JCR from the Perspective of Academic Evaluation: A Case Study of the Category of the “Information Science and Library Science”
Date Issued
2016
Date
2016
Author(s)
Shaw, Wang-Ching
Abstract
The Impact Factor (IF) ranking of journals in Journal Citation Reports (JCR) influences journal’s academic evaluation and the IF ranking is close related to its journal category. Therefore, I put this research into the perspective of academic evaluation to analyze the 88 “Information Science and Library Science” (IS&LS) journals that are included in JCR to explore the category problem of JCR through bibliometrics. I analyze the citations and author’s institutions of the four different sub-categories, “LS” (Library Science)、”IS” (Information Science)、”SM” (Scientometrics) and “MIS” (Management Information System), and four specific journals (LISR、JASIST、SMs、MISQ), also examine the Impact Factor and Quartile distribution of these journals. As for discipline of citation, my research shows that the articles in IS&LS、LS、IS and SM mostly cite the literature from the LIS, except articles in MIS. Articles in LS, IS and SM cite the literature in LIS, computer science, general science and medicine most, while the articles in MIS most cite the literature from computer science, MIS, management and business. It worth mentioned that the citation disciplines between LIS and MIS are not very close. As for citation in specific journal, LISR, JASIST and SMs are mostly citing and cited by journals in LIS and are least by journals in MIS. MISQ is mostly citing and cited by journals in computer science and business, has no cross citation with journals in LIS, which means the selected journal between MIS and LIS have few cross citations. As for the author’s institutions, authors in IS&LS, LIS journals are mostly based in LIS institutions; authors in MIS basically come from business school and MIS, few come from LIS. It is obvious that the authors in MIS and LIS journals do not come from the similar discipline institutions. The authors in selected journals also show the similar feature. The authors in my selected journal of LIS are from LIS; authors in MISQ are mostly from business school, MIS and management, very few come from LIS. My research finds that the citation discipline and author’s institution discipline of journals in four subcategories are with high heterogeneity in MIS and LIS (LS, IS, SM). MIS is inclined to transdisciplinary and has faster development than LIS. The IF is significantly different between MIS and LIS. The Q value of MIS falls in Q1, while the Q value of LS mostly falls in Q4. LIS though leads in numbers of journals, articles, and authors but the average numbers of citation per article are far behind the MIS, which means the difference between LIS and MIS falls not only in citation discipline and author background but also in citation behaviors. According to the citation analysis in this research, my finding shows that IS&LS and LIS are statically significant in citation discipline and author’s institutions. However, MIS and LIS have significant difference in citation discipline, author institutions and IF. As we can see, the top 25% in journal ranking are mostly occupied by MIS journals, which might have negative impact on the IF ranking and academic evaluation of the LIS journals and authors. Besides, LIS journals seldom cite the MIS journals, and articles in MIS almost don’t cite articles in LIS Journals. The authors in MIS and LIS journals mostly come from institutions in different disciplines. To conclude, the journals in MIS and LIS are heterogeneous.
Subjects
journal classification
JCR category
library and information science
information science and library science
citation analysis
Type
thesis
File(s)![Thumbnail Image]()
Loading...
Name
ntu-105-D97126001-1.pdf
Size
23.54 KB
Format
Adobe PDF
Checksum
(MD5):a7b4eab23e57c796f2abad8a88d8f3b7