Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2304.04821 v1 pith:GCQ4A6PX submitted 2023-04-10 cs.DL cs.SI

Characteristics of LIS Research Articles Affecting Their Citation Impact

classification cs.DL cs.SI
keywords citationimpactarticlescompositiondisciplinaryreceivedcharacteristicscitations
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

The paper analyses the citation impact of Library and Information Science, LIS for short, research articles published in 31 leading international LIS journals in 2015. The main research question is: to what degree do authors' disciplinary composition in association with other content characteristics of LIS articles affect their citation impact? The impact is analysed in terms of the number of citations received and their authority, using outlier normalization and subfield normalization. The article characteristics analysed using quantitative content analysis include topic, methodology, type of contribution, and the disciplinary composition of their author teams. The citations received by the articles are traced from 2015 to May 2021. Citing document authority is measured by the citations they had received up to May 2021. The overall finding was that authors' disciplinary composition is significantly associated with citation scores. The differences in citation scores between disciplinary compositions appeared typically within information retrieval and scientific communication. In both topics LIS and computer science jointly received significantly higher citation scores than many disciplines like LIS alone or humanities in information retrieval, or natural sciences, medicine, or social sciences alone in scientific communication. The paper is original in allowing joint analysis of content, authorship composition, and impact.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.