A preview of this full-text is provided by Springer Nature.
Content available from Publishing Research Quarterly
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
Vol:.(1234567890)
Publishing Research Quarterly (2018) 34:456–470
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-018-9590-3
1 3
Forty‑Five Years ofLIS Research Evolution, 1971–2015:
AnInformetrics Study oftheAuthor‑Supplied Keywords
OmwoyoBosireOnyancha1
Published online: 21 June 2018
© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018
Abstract
This article sought to investigate the evolution of library and information science
by tracking the author-supplied keywords in the research articles published in the
domain between 1971 and 2015. Data was extracted from Thomson Reuters’ citation
mainstream indexes and analysed using the VosViewer computer-aided software to
obtain author-supplied keyword frequencies in each decade since 1971. We identi-
fied the most salient and common research themes in LIS and how the themes have
evolved, by delving into the author-supplied keywords to proxy research themes in
the field domain. Results indicate that the field of LIS has evolved in terms of its
subject focus from information systems design and management in the 1970s to sci-
entific communication, information storage and retrieval, information access, infor-
mation and knowledge management, and user education in 2015. The application
of ICTs in LIS practice and education, too, has emerged as a prominent topic in the
field. These issues have the potential of shaping or have shaped the LIS curriculum
in some LIS schools in the continent.
Keywords Library and information science· Research· Social network analysis·
Co-occurrence analysis· Informetrics, keywords
Introduction
Ke etal. [19] have observed that there is an increase in interest to understand the
dynamics and characteristics of scientific production and the evolution of science.
To that end, Chang etal. [5] opine that exploring research trends in a discipline
facilitates a deeper understanding of the development of the discipline. On their part,
Goldfinch and Yamamoto [13, 8] offer the basis of such an exploration by stating
that “disciplines themselves are unstable and change over time”. Similar sentiments
* Omwoyo Bosire Onyancha
onyanob@unisa.ac.za
1 Department ofInformation Science, University ofSouth Africa, Unisa, PO Box392,
Pretoria0003, SouthAfrica
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.