Research Productivity in the field of Library and Information Science: A Scientometric analysis based on articles published in UK Journals

Garima Bisaria

Abstract


The present paper examines gender differences in published LIS literature in the four journals of UK during 2007-2017. The results shows that 56.29% total male as first authors while 43.71% female LIS first authors contributed articles. Male as single authors are cited 12.42%, followed by male-male co-authored publications with 12.36% of papers, though the cited gap is less prominent among both the genders. The citation received by articles elucidates that male-male authorship pattern with 25.12% and male solo with 21.3% citations supersedes female solo 15.33% and female-female accumulated citations i.e. 12.08%. Further proved by Kruskal-Wallis test which revealed the significant differences between citations and authorship collaboration (χ²=23.088), followed by Mann-Whitney test for citation data across author collaborations has found significant difference between the following authorship affiliations and citations received by MM & F (U=61030.500); M & MM (U=76616.500); M& MF (U=36967.500s); MF & F (U= 29300.500) and MF & FF (U= 21842.500). Male LIS researchers from academic category and female LIS researchers from non-academic professional category contributed articles. The study proved gender difference in research among LIS professionals of UK though the difference is marginal.


Full Text:

PDF

References


Atchison, L. (2017). Negating the gender citation advantage in Political Science.PS: Political Science & Politic, 50(2), 448–55. doi: 10.1017/S1049096517000014.

Bordons, M., Morillo, F., Fernández, M.T & Gómez, I. One step further in the production of bibliometric indicators at the micro level: Differences by gender and professional category of scientists. Scientometrics,, 57(2), 159-173. doi: 10.1023/A:1024181400646.

Braisher, T., Symonds, R., & Gemmell, N.J. (2005). Publication success in Nature and Science is not gender dependent.” BioEssays, 27(8), 858–59. doi:10.1002/bies.20272.

Cameron, E., White, A., & Gray, M. (2016).Solving the productivity and impact puzzle: Do men outperform women, or are metrics biased?” BioScience, 66(3), 245–52. doi:10.1093/biosci/biv173.

Cole, R., & Zuckerman, H. (1984).Persistence and change in patterns of publication of men and women scientists. Advances in Motivation and Achievement: A Research Annual Vol 2, Edited by Marjorie W. Steinkempt and Martin L. Maehr, Greenwich, Connecticut: Jai Press Inc., pp.217-258.

Cole, S. (1979). Age and scientific performance. American Journal of Sociology, 84(4), 958–77.

Davenport, E and Snyder, H. (1995). Who cites women? Whom do women cite: An exploration of gender and scholarly citation in Sociology Journal of Documentation, 51(4), 404 - 410. http://doi.org/10.1108/eb026958

Evans, K., & Moulder, A. (2011). Reflecting on a decade of women’s publications in four top Political science journals. PS: Political Science & Politics, 44(4), 793–98. doi: 10.1017/S1049096511001296.

Fox, M. F. (2005). Gender, Family characteristics, and publication productivity among scientists. Social Studies of Science, 35(1), 131–150. doi:10.1177/0306312705046630

Fox, M. (1991). Gender, environmental milieu, and productivity in Science In The Outer Circle: Women in the Scientific Community, Edited by H. Zuckerman, J. Cole, and J. Bruer, New York: W. W. Norton, 188-204.

Garg, K., & Kumar, S. Scientometric profile of Indian scientific output in life sciences with a focus on the contributions of women scientists. Scientometrics, 98(3).doi:10.1007/s11192-013-1107-4.

Gul, S, Shah, T., Hamade, S., Mushtaq, R., & Koul, I. (2016).Effects of gender in Library and Information Science research: A Case Study of The Electronic Library The Electronic Library, 34(3), 488–503. doi: 10.1108/EL-08-2014-0126.

Hanson, S. (2000). Networking. The Professional Geographer, 52(4), 751–58. doi:10.1111/0033-0124.00263.

Hargens, L. (1988). Scholarly consensus and journal rejection rates American Sociological Review, 53(1), 139. doi: 10.2307/2095739.

Jagsi R.., Guancial A., Worobey, C., Henault, E., Chang, Y., Starr, R., Tarbell J., & Hylek ,M.(2006). The 'Gender Gap’ in authorship of academic Medical literature — A 35-Year Perspective New England Journal of Medicine, 355(3), 281–87. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa053910.

Kauffman, D., & Frances, P. (1989). Institutionalized sexism in universities: The case of geographically bound academic women NWSA Journal, 1(4), 644–59.

Kyvik, S. (1990). Motherhood and Scientific Productivity Social Studies of Science, 20(1), 149–60. doi: 10.1177/030631290020001005.

Kyvik, S., & Teigen, M.(1996). Child care, research collaboration, and gender differences in scientific productivity. Science Technology and Human Values, 21(1), 54–71. https://doi.org/10.1177/016224399602100103

Larivière, V., Vignola-Gagné, E., Villeneuve, C., Gélinas, P., & Gingras, Y.(2011). Sex differences in research funding, productivity and Impact: An analysis of Québec university professors. Scientometrics, 87(3), 483–98. doi: 10.1007/s11192-011-0369-y.

Leta, J., & Lewison, G. (2003).The contribution of women in Brazilian science: A case study in astronomy, immunology and oceanography Scientometrics, 57, 339-353.doi: 10.1023/A: 1025000600840.

Lewison, G. (2001).The quantity and quality of female researchers: A bibliometric study of Iceland Scientometrics, 52, 29–43. doi: 10.1023/A: 1012794810883.

Mahapatra, M. (1985). On the Validity of the theory of Exponential Growth of Scientific Literature. Proceeding: of the 15th IASLIC Conference on bibliometric studies: Application of quantatative method to study the published literature; current needs and resources, Bangalore, 1985. Edited by I.N.Sengupta and S.K.Kapoor, 61-70.

Mauleón, E., & Bordons, M.(2006). Productivity, impact and publication habits by gender in the area of Materials Science. Scientometrics, 66, 199-218.doi: 10.1007/s11192-006-0014-3.

McDowell, M., & Smith, K. (1992). The effect of gender‐sorting on propensity to coauthor: implications for academic promotion. Economic Inquiry, 30(1), 68–82. doi:10.1111/j.1465-7295.1992.tb01536.x.

Merton, K. (1988).The Matthew effect in Science, II: Cumulative advantage and the symbolism of intellectual property. Isis, 79(4), 606–623.

National Research Council. (1987). Women: Their underrepresentation and career differentials in Science and Engineering: Proceedings of a conference. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. doi:10.17226/18771

Ogbogu, C. (2009). An analysis of female research productivity in Nigerian universities Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 31(1), 17–22. doi: 10.1080/13600800802558841

Prpic, Katarina. (2002). Gender and productivity differentials in Science. Scientometrics, 55. 27-58, 32.

Scharber. A., & Ouyang, F. (2019) Illuminating the (in) visibility of female scholars: A gendered analysis of publishing rates within Educational Technology journals from 2004 to 2015 Gender and Education , 31(1), 33–61. doi:10.1080/09540253.2017.1290219.

Schrager, S., Bouwkamp, C., & Mundt, M. (2011). Gender and first authorship of papers in Family Medicine journals 2006–2008. Family medicine, 43(3), 155-9.

Scott, J.(1992). Measures of sex differences in scientific productivity. Social Forces, 71(1), 159–178. doi:10.1093/sf/71.1.159

Sidhu, R., Rajashekhar, P., Lavin, V., Parry, J., Attwood, J., Holdcroft., Anita, S., & David, S. (2009).The gender imbalance in Academic Medicine: A study of female authorship in the United Kingdom. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 102(8), 337–42. doi:10.1258/jrsm.2009.080378.

Stack S. (2002) .Gender and scholarly productivity: 1970–2000. Sociological Focus, 35(3), 285–96. doi:10.1080/00380237.2002.10570704.

Symonds, M., Gemmell, N., Braisher, T., Gorringe, K., & Elgar, M. (2006).Gender differences in publication output: Towards an unbiased metric of research performance. PLoS ONE, edited by Tom Tregenza, 1(1), e127. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0000127.

Vasil, L. (1992). Self-efficacy expectations and causal attributions for achievement among male and female university faculty. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 4(3), 259–69. doi: 10.1016/0001-8791(92)90028-X.

Webster, B. (2001).Polish women in science: A bibliometric analysis of Polish science and its publications, 1980-1999. Research Evaluation - RES EVALUAT, 10(3), 185-194. doi:10.3152/147154401781776999.

Xie, Y.,& Shauman, A. (1998).Sex differences in research productivity: New evidence about an old puzzle. American Sociological Review, 63(6), 847. doi: 10.2307/2657505.

Yang, K., & Lee, J.(2012).Analysis of publication patterns in Korean Library and Information Science research. Scientometrics, 93(2), 233–51. doi: 10.1007/s11192-012-0663-3.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Disclaimer 2016-2019 © Indian Library Association (ILA), All Rights Reserved.

Designed and Developed by Dr. Mohammad Nazim under the direction of Prof. Shabahat Husain.