A BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS OF JOURNAL OF INFORMATION LITERACY (2011 TO 2015)

Abstract

This paper has been examined the bibliometric analysis of “Journal of Information Literacy” during the period of 2011 to 2015. The total 155 articles have been revealed from five volumes. The result found that the forty seven percent of articles throughout study were analysis in nature. The typical range (15.52%) of citations per article has been found and 22.58 percent of articles contained author’s self-citation and similarly 20 percent of citations were received by the Journals. The majority of single author publications have covers and therefore the contribution of articles throughout the study was towards a single author approach. The 0.26 was the degree of coauthors collaboration were traced and the foremost prolific contributor Secker J. The highest number (56.36%) of authors contributed from UK and the foremost productive establishment was London College of Political Economy and Social Science. However, the study indicates that library and information science researchers have made significant contributions to information literacy study.

Full text

44
ISST Journal of Advances In Librarianship, Vol. 7 No. 2, (July - December 2016), p.p. 44-51
ISSN No. 0976-9021 © Intellectuals Society for Socio-Techno Welfare
A BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS OF JOURNAL OF INFORMATION
LITERACY (2011 TO 2015)
Somaraya B. Tallolli and K.R. Mulla
1 Librarian, Don Bosco Institute of Technology, Bangalore-560074, Karnataka, India
2 Librarian, Visvesvaraya Technological University, Belagavi-590018, Karnataka, India
E-Mail: sbtallolli@gmail.com, krmulla@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
This paper has been examined the bibliometric analysis of “Journal of Information Literacy” during the period of 2011 to 2015. The
total 155 articles have been revealed from ve volumes. The result found that the forty seven percent of articles throughout study were
analysis in nature. The typical range (15.52%) of citations per article has been found and 22.58 percent of articles contained author’s
self-citation and similarly 20 percent of citations were received by the Journals. The majority of single author publications have covers
and therefore the contribution of articles throughout the study was towards a single author approach. The 0.26 was the degree of co-
authors collaboration were traced and the foremost prolic contributor Secker J. The highest number (56.36%) of authors contributed
from UK and the foremost productive establishment was London College of Political Economy and Social Science. However, the study
indicates that library and information science researchers have made signicant contributions to information literacy study.
Keywords: Bibliometrics, Authorship Pattern, Citation Analysis, Information Literacy, Journal of Information Literacy.
1. INTRODUCTION
Information literacy is a set of abilities requiring
individuals to recognize when information is needed and
have the ability to locate, evaluate, and use effectively
the needed information (ALA, 1989) considering this the
Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals
(CILIP) Information Literacy Group, United Kingdom
started publishing “Journal of Information Literacy (JIL)”
(http://ojs.lboro.ac.uk/ojs/index.php/JIL). This journal is
an International peer-reviewed journal published original
articles based on innovative and challenging research,
project reports, conferences and book reviews to push
the boundaries of information literacy thinking in theory,
practice and methods. The Journal aims to encourage the
development of information literacy by publishing material
on all aspects of the subject, practical and theoretical and
impact of information literacies in everyday contexts,
education and the workplace.
Bibliometrics analysis is a branch of bibliometrics where
the unit of study on documents publication patterns and
bibliographic references. Bibliometrics is valuable tool
for describing and promoting scientic productivity
(McBurney and Novak (2002). The Alan Pritchard
dened term Bibliometrics the application of mathematics
and statistical methods to books and other media of
communication” (Pritchard, 1969). The productivity of
publications in the context of scientic output is measured
in terms of published literature (Sangam and Arali 2016)
these studies are used to identify the pattern of publication,
authorship, citations and journal coverage with the hope
that such studies can give an insight into the dynamics of
the domain under consideration (Vijayakumar & Naqvi,
2002). This study is an attempt to analyse the JIL which
was essential to understand the information literacy
research trends in LIS. To this end the analysis has covered
the authorship patterns, type of publications, the number of
citations used per article, and length of papers.
2. RELATED LITERATURE STUDY
Over the period the many bibliometric or scientometrics
analysis research studies have been carried out of many
researchers. In this paper only a few relevant bibliometric
studies have been covered for reviewing the past literature
on the eld. Lipetz (1999) examined the authorship
pattern of JASIS which has grown with a doubling time
of about 20 years which is similar to the growth of papers.
Further, researcher revealed that the number of scholarly
papers published per year has also grown-up followed
by academic afliation. Surprisingly the average number
of citations per paper dropped (8.3 to 7.0) but the ratio
has been increased rapidly. Identifying and Mapping the

45
Information Science and Scientometrics Analysis Studies
in India (2005-2009): A Bibliometric Study was carried out
by Mulla.K.R (2012) the study measuring the number of
contributions and highlight the quantitative contributions
made by the researchers in the eld of information science
and scientometrics. Further, it revealed that the totals of
998 publications were traced and 91.98 percentages of
articles were published in journals, the 62.42 percentage
of articles were between in 5 to10 pages length. The most
prolic author was B M Gupta stands rst rank with 0.94
percentages of papers contributions. The 83.99 percentages
of articles have been published from India
Another study was carried by Tiew, Abdullah and Kaur
(2002) on the Malaysian Journal of Library and Information
Science, the study revealed that the 69.74 percentage of the
articles were research oriented,’ the multi-authored papers
was slightly higher at (52.6%) Similarly, 45 percentage
of authors were geographically afliated to Malaysia,’
the representation of authors from library school was 5.2
percentage, the most popular subject was Scientic and
Professional Publishing, 39.5 percentage articles contained
author’s self-citation, while the rate of journal self-citation
was found to be 27.6 percentage. The Average number
of references per article was 22.5 and average length per
article was 41.2 pages. However, Bakri and Willett (2008)
also examined the publication and citation patterns in and
compared the earlier study by Tiew et al. (2002) covering
the period 1996-2000. The results found that the number
of publications has been increased from the 76 articles
to 85 articles, the most prolic author was found Zainab
contributed 14 articles and she has been the editor of
the journal. There were 11 authors associated with two
papers and 86 authors associated with a single Paper. The
complete set of 161 articles attracted a total of 87 citations,
52 of which were self-citations, with 14 percentage of the
MJLIS articles having been cited at least once.
However, the Journal of Information Literacy was
examined for a period of six year from 2007 to 2012 by
Ipsita Panda, Bulu Maharana & Durllav Charan Chhatar
(2013) they found that the single authors were contributed
maximum (68.67%) articles, similarly maximum
contribution (71.75%) were from United Kingdom.
Further, the 51.90percentage of papers were research
papers and average number of citation of each paper was
12 and it also revealed that, almost 62 (47.32%) papers’
length ranges is between 1 to 5 pages and average length
of papers was 9 pages.
3. OBJECTIVES
The attempt has been made by the investigator to analyze
the data collected from the Journal of Information Literacy
for the period of ve (2011-2015) years. The present study
is analyzed based on the following objectives.
To study the quantitative growth and type of
publications.
To analyse the distribution of citations.
To nd out the most prolic contributors and
afliations.
To study the citation patters and self-citations.
To analyse the authorship pattern of contributors.
4. DATA AND METHODS
An attempt has been made to analyze the data collected
for the study to get the desired objectives. The present
study is based on the Bibliometric analysis of Journal of
Information Literacy. The required data has been collected
from the journal ofcial website (www.ojs.lboro.ac.uk)
for the period of ve years (2011 to 2015) the 155 articles
were published during the period and a range of data was
then extracted from each of the downloaded articles. Each
issue of the journal was carefully consulted to record the
exact bibliographic details. The investigator extracted the
following data: year wise publications, volume wise, issues
wise, number of authors, author’s name, number of pages,
number of citations, and afliation of author. Further, it
also considered to extract the data pertain to author self-
citations and journal received self-citations.
5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
5.1. Quantitative Growth of Articles by Volume
Table one showed that, the total (155) number of articles
published from 2011 to 2015 were from ve volumes. The
distribution of articles by volume shows that the number
of articles was highest in 2014 with 34 (21.93%) articles.
The range of articles published per year during the period
under the study was 34 to 25. It was also noted that except
2015 the publications of the articles has been increased in
every year.
Table -1: Frequency distribution of Articles by Volumes
Year Vol.
No
No. of
Articles Percentage Cumulative
total Percentage
2011 5 25 16.13 25 16.13
2012 6 32 20.64 57 36.77
2013 7 33 21.3 90 58.07
2014 8 34 21.93 124 80.00
2015 9 31 20 155 100.00
Total 155 100 -- --
5.2 Types of Articles Published
Table two revealed that, the majority (47.1%) of the articles
A Bibliometric Analysis of Journal of Information Literacy (2011 to 2015)

46
published in the Journal of Information Literacy were
research in nature, second position stands book reviews
with (19.35%) and followed by projects, conference,
seminar and symposium articles (18.71% & 14.84%)
respectively.
5.3 Distribution of citations by volumes
The table three depicts that, the volume wise distribution
of citations during the period of study were indicated that
in Journal of Information Literacy were covered 2407
citations from the 155 published articles. Similarly, the
average numbers of citations per article were found 15.52.
The year 2014 and the highest citations per article were
traced 537 (22.31%) and followed by 517 (21.48%) in the
year 2013, 514 (21.36%) in the year 2012, 513 (21.31%) in
the year 2015 and 326(13.54%) in the year 2011.
5.4 Range and percentage of citations per articles
It is found that the 31.61 percentages of articles were not
cited any references because the majority articles are book
reviews, conferences, and seminars in this category. The
range of the citations between 1 to 5 with 21.93 percentage
of articles, range between 6 to 10 references covered 5.8
percentages of articles and the more than 50 articles were
covered 9.03 percentage of citation between 10 to 45
references respective details are mentioned in table four.
Table-2: Types of articles Published during the period
Articles 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Percentage
Research Articles 12 17 15 14 15 73 47.1
Projects 4 4 9 6 6 29 18.71
Conferences 2 4 4 6 7 23 14.84
Book Reviews 7 7 5 8 3 30 19.35
Total 25
(16.13)
32
(20.65)
33
(21.29)
34
(21.93)
31
(20.00) 155 100.00
Table 3: Distribution of citations by volumes
Year Vol.
No
No of
citations No of Articles Average Number of
citations per article
Cumulative
Citations Percentage
2011 5 326 25 13.54 326 13.54
2012 6 514 32 21.36 840 34.9
2013 7 517 33 21.48 1357 56.38
2014 8 537 34 22.31 1894 78.69
2015 9 513 31 21.31 2407 100.00
Total 2407 155 100 -- --
5.5 Authorship pattern with degree of collaboration
(DC)
The table ve shows that the authorship pattern of articles
published in the journal of information Literacy. The
majority (73.55%) of single author publications were traced
during the study period. The two author’s contributions
were found 17.42 percentages and total multi-author
collaboration of articles was 26.45 percentages. It shows
that article publication trend was towards the single
author’s approach.
The degree of collaboration of co-authors publications
among total publications in order to determine the degree
of collaboration, the formula suggested by Subramanyam
(1982) has been used as follows:
DC: NM/Nm+Ns
Nm=Number of multiple authors publications
Ns=Single authors Publications
Dc: 41/ (41+114) =0.26
The degree of collaboration has been calculated through
the above formula and it is found that 0.26. It also shows
that the trend of contribution of articles in JIL was towards
single author approach.
Somaraya B. Tallolli and K.R. Mulla

47
5.6 Ranked List of most prolic contributor
The most prolic contributor was Secker J the editor of JIL
and has contributed 6 articles. Secondly, Cathie Jackson
has contributed 4 articles and followed by Alana Carbery,
Maria Bell, Pamela A McKinney, Philip Russell and
Stephen Gold stein were contributed each 2 papers during
Table-4: Range and percentage of citations per Articles
Citations No of Articles Percentage Cumulative
No of Articles Percentage
0 49 31.61 49 31.61
1 to 5 34 21.93 83 53.54
6 to 10 9 5.8 92 59.35
11 to 15 7 4.51 99 63.87
16 to 20 4 2.6 103 66.45
21 to 25 9 5.81 112 72.25
26 to 30 8 5.16 120 77.41
31 to 35 9 5.81 129 83.22
36 to 40 6 3.87 135 87.09
41 to 45 6 3.87 141 90.96
46 to 50 0 0 141 90.96
>50 14 9.03 155
Table-5: Authorship Pattern and degree of collaboration
No of Authors 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Numbers Percentage
Single Author 20 22 24 26 22 114 73.55
Two Authors 1 7 7 6 6 27 17.42
Three Authors 3 1 1 1 1 7 4.52
Four Authors 1 1 1 1 2 6 3.87
>Four Authors 0 1 0 0 0 1 0.64
Total 25
(16.13)
32
(20.65)
33
(21.29)
34
(21.93)
31
(20.00) 155 100
Table: 6: Most prolic contributor
Rank Authors No of Contributions No of authors
1 Secker, J. 6 6
2 Cathie Jackson, 4 4
3 Alan Carbery, 3 3
3 Maria Bell, 3 3
3 Pamela A McKinney, 3 3
3 Philip Russell, 3 3
3 Stephane Gold stein 3 3
4 14 Authors 2 28
5167 Authors 1167
Total 220
the period of study. However, 14 authors were contributed
each 2 articles and 167 authors were contributed each one
article which shows in the below table six
5.7 Authors by Geographical Afliation
The table seven depicts that, the total 220 authors from 11
A Bibliometric Analysis of Journal of Information Literacy (2011 to 2015)

48
countries were contributed 155 articles in ve years during
2011 to 2015. The majority (56.36%) of authors contributed
from the United Kingdom and the USA stands second with
23.18 percentages of articles among the publications. The
followed by Ireland (4.52%), Canada (4.1%), Norway
(3.64%), Singapore (3.18%) and Germany (2.73%) were
contributed articles respectively and followed by other
countries author’s contributed.
5.8 Ranking of most productive Institution
The study found that the most prolic institutions which
contributed the number of authors and their contribution
to the journals under the study. The most productive
institution is London School of Economics and political
science, United Kingdom. The afliation numbers of the
author from this institution were 10. The next prolic
institution was Cardiff University, United Kingdom. The
afliation with this university was 5 authors and followed
by other respective institutions and universities authors’
afliation is shown in table eight.
5.9. Length of Articles (pages)
The length of articles in terms of pages out of 155 articles
92 (59.35%) was between 1 to 5 pages in length and the
21 articles (13.54%) were in 11 to 15 pages in length. The
only 2.6 percentage articles have found 26 to 30 pages of
length; the details are shown in table nine.
5.10. Author Self Citation
The table ten revealed that the self-citation of the authors
under the study out of the total 155 articles there are 35
(22.58%) articles have been found authors self-citation and
the highest 11(32.35%) authors have found self-citation in
the year 2014. Further, it also indicates that the contributors
Table.7: Ranked list of Authors by Geographical Afliation
Rank Country of afliation No of Authors Percentage
1 UK 124 56.36
2 USA 51 23.18
3 Ireland 10 4.52
4 Canada 9 4.01
5 Norway 8 3.64
6 Singapore 7 3.18
7 Germany 6 2.73
8 Israel 2 0.91
9 Australia 1 0.46
9 Jamaica 1 0.46
9 Netherlands 1 0.46
Total 220 100.00
were more active in the research in Information Literacy
eld and contributed more articles.
5.11. Journal received Citation
The Journal of Information Literacy during the period
of study found that out of the total 155 articles there are
31 articles (20%) revealed Journals self-citation and the
highest (29.41%) number of Journals self-citation found in
the year 2014. The low percentage of Journal self-citation
was not surprising considering the relatively young age of
the Journal under the study.
6. RESULTS AND FINDINGS
With the above discussion and interpretation researcher
found that the following inferences during the period of
study.
• It has been noted that except 2015 the publications of
the article every year increased to some extent.
• The Majority of the articles published in the Journal
of Information Literacy during the period of study
was research in nature (47.1%) and followed by book
reviews (19.35%) projects(18.71%) and conference,
Seminar and symposium (14.84%) respectively.
• The average number of citations per article was 15.52.
• The 31.61 percentage of contributions have not
mentioned the citations because the majority of them
were book reviews, conferences and seminars in this
category.
• The single author publications have been covered
73.55 percentages and the degree of collaboration of
Somaraya B. Tallolli and K.R. Mulla

49
Table-8: Ranking of most productive Institution
Rank Institution No of
Authors Percentage Cumulative Total
1 London School of Economics and political science, United Kingdom 10 4.54 4.54
2 Cardiff University, United Kingdom 8 3.64 8.18
3 Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 6 2.73 10.91
3University of Shefeld, United Kingdom 6 2.73 13.64
4 ITT Dublin, Ireland 5 2.27 15.91
4 University of Liverpool, United Kingdom 5 2.27 18.18
5 Long Island University, United States 4 1.82 20
5 Oakland University, United States 4 1.82 21.82
5 Østfold University College, Norway 4 1.82 23.64
5 Leibniz Institute for Psychology Information Universitätsring, Trier, Germany 4 1.82 25.46
5 University of Birmingham, United Kingdom 4 1.82 27.28
5 University of Worcester, United Kingdom 4 1.82 29.1
6 Dominican University of California, United States 3 1.36 30.46
6 London Metropolitan University 3 1.36 31.82
6 Manchester Metropolitan University, United Kingdom 3 1.36 33.18
6 McGill University, Canada 3 1.36 34.54
6 Research Information Network, London, United Kingdom 3 1.36 35.9
6 Robert Gordon University, United Kingdom 3 1.36 37.26
6 School of Information, University of Michigan, United States 3 1.36 38.62
6Shefeld Hallam University, United Kingdom 3 1.36 39.98
6 York St John University, United Kingdom 3 1.36 41.34
7 23 Universities and institutions 46 20.92 62.26
8 83 Other Institutions and Universities 83 37.74 100
Total 220 100 --
Table-9: Length of Articles
No of Pages per article No of Article Percentage
1 to 5 92 59.35
6 to 10 7 4.51
11 to 15 21 13.54
16 to 20 20 12.09
21 to 25 11 7.01
26 to 30 4 2.06
Total 155 100
co-authors publications among total publications was
0.26.
• The most prolic contributor Secker J the editor of
the Journal of Information Literacy and the majority
(56.36%) of contributor from the United Kingdom,
followed by USA and others.
• The most productive institution under study is The
London School of Economics and political science.
• The 22.58 percentage of articles contained self-citation
and 20 percentage contained Journals self-citation.
A Bibliometric Analysis of Journal of Information Literacy (2011 to 2015)

50
7. CONCLUSION
The purpose of this study is to measure the number of
contributions and highlight quantitatively the contributions
made by the researchers in the eld of information literacy
the total 155 articles has been published in the rate of 31
articles per year. The overall 2407 citations have been
found from ve volumes in the rate of 481.4 citations
per volumes. The 47.1 percent of articles were research
in nature and JILs have been provided the maximum
importance for books reviews (19.35%) projects (18.71%),
seminar conference and students opinions and articles
during the period. The degree of collaboration (0.26) shows
that there is need of encouraging the multiple author’s
contributions to the journal. The most prolic contributor
was Secker J the editor of the Journal and contributed the
6 articles in ve years. The London School of Economics
and political science has been contributed more papers and
made the institution as a most productive institution during
the period. The major contribution found during the study
was United Kingdom (56.36%) and USA (23.18%). The
surprise to see that the very less contribution from Asian
countries but no contribution from India during the study.
The journal has to be encourage to contributors to promote
and enhance the information literacy education in other
parts of the world.
Table-10: Author Self Citation
Year Vol. No of Papers Authors self-citation Year wise Percentage
2011 5 25 5 20.00
2012 6 32 8 25.00
2013 7 33 6 18.18
2014 8 34 11 32.35
2015 9 31 5 16.12
Total 155 35
Table-11: Journal received Citation
Year Vol. No of Papers Journal received citation Year wise Percentage
2011 5 25 3 12.00
2012 6 32 7 21.87
2013 7 33 5 15.15
2014 8 34 10 29.41
2015 9 31 6 19.35
Total 155 31
REFERENCES
[1] ALA. (1989). Presidential Committee on Information
Literacy. Final Report. Chicago: American Library
Association. Available at: http://www.ala.org/acrl/
publications/whitepapers/presidential
[2] Bakri, A., & Willett, P. (2008). The Malaysian
Journal of Library and Information Science 2001-
2006: A bibliometric study. Malaysian Journal of
Library and Information Science, 13(1), 103-116.
[3] Panda, Ipsita., Maharana, Bulu., & Chhatar, Durllav
Charan. (2013). The Journal of Information Literacy:
A Bibliometric. International Journal of Scientic
and Research Publications, 3(3).
[4] Lipetz, Ben-Ami. (1999). Aspects of JASIS
authorship through ve decades. Journal of the
American Society for Information Science and
Technology, 50(11) ,994-1003.
[5] Mcburney, M., & Novak, P. (2002). What is
bibliometrics and why should you care? Paper
presented at IEEE International Professional
Communication Conference, 108-114.
[6] Mulla, K. R. (2012). Identifying and Mapping the
Information Science and Scientometrics Analysis
Studies in India (2005-2009): A Bibliometric Study.
Library Philosophy and Practice, 772. Retrieved
Somaraya B. Tallolli and K.R. Mulla

51
from http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/772.
[17] S. L. Sangam., & Uma, Arali. (2016). Growth versus
scientic collaboration in the eld of genetics:
A scientometrics analysis. Collnet Journal of
Scientometrics and Information Management, 10(1),
9-19.
[8] Subramanyam, K. (1982).Research collaboration
and funding in biochemistry and chemical
engineering. International Forum on Information and
Documentation, 7(4), 26-29.
[9] JIL. (2016). The Journal of Information Literacy
Retrieved from http://ojs.lboro.ac.uk/ojs/index.php/
JIL
[10] Tiew, W. S., Abdullah, A., & Kaur, K. (2002).
Malaysian Journal of Library and Information
Science 1996-2000: a bibliometric study. Malaysian
Journal of Library and Information Science, 6 (2),
43-56.
[11] Vijayakumar, M., & Naqvi, S.H. (2002). Authorship
tends in Azadirachta Indica literature: A bibliometric
study. SERLS Journal of Information Management,
39(4), 445-455.
[12] Warraich, Nosheen Fatima.,& Ahmad, Sajjad.
(2011). Pakistan Journal of Library and Information
Science: A bibliometric analysis. Pakistan Journal of
Library & Information Science, 12 ,1-7.
A Bibliometric Analysis of Journal of Information Literacy (2011 to 2015)