Content uploaded by Akhandanand Shukla
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Akhandanand Shukla on Nov 30, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
1
Pre-print
Cite as (APA 6
th
Ed.):
Shukla, Akhandanand & Maurya, Sanjay Kumar. (2018). Performance of Scholarly
Communications of LIS in Global Perspective: A Scientometric Assessment. Library
Progress (International), 38(2), 199-210.
Performance of Scholarly Communications of LIS in Global
Perspective: A Scientometric Assessment
Dr. Akhandanand Shukla
Assistant Professor
Department of Library & Information Science
Mizoram University, Aizawl
Email: akhandanandshukla@gmail.com
Sanjay Kumar Maurya
Research Scholar
Department of Library & Information Science
Mizoram University, Aizawl
Email: sanjay2015maurya@gmail.com
Abstract
Paper deals with the scientometric analysis of scholarly communications of LIS in world level.
Further study includes only top 25 countries of the world in terms of their performance in
scholarly communications. Scopus database has been used for collection of data. The study
analyses the extent of scholarly communications of LIS in terms of total scholarly
communications, citable scholarly communications, and non-citable scholarly communications.
Similarly, citations data has been analyzed in terms of total citations, self-citations, and revised
citations for top 25 countries. Performances of top 25 countries have also been studied by h-
index calculations. The United States and the United Kingdom has been found as top performers
in scholarly communications of LIS in the global scenario.
Keywords: Research Performance, LIS Communications, Citations, Scholarly Communications,
h-index, Scientometric Performance, Scopus.
1. Introduction
Library and Information Science (LIS) existence has been observed since more than 135 years.
During this long journey, LIS has observed many changes in its structure and services. These
changes have been noticed through researches conducted in the field. The growth in information
and communication technology (ICT) restructured the way of services and publishing of
scholarly literature of the field. “Scholarly communication involves publishing the research
findings by academics and researchers in order to share and make available the academic or
research output to the global community of researchers (Saroja, 2016)”. According to Kauffer &
Carley (1993), “researchers publish their works with the purpose of gaining ownership of an
idea, to get societal recognition, to claim priority for a discovery and to establish a community of
authors and readers.” There are a number of prestigious journals in which scholarly
communications takes place. These journals have been aggregated by database providers for
making a profit from the scholarly activities of researchers of different fields. LIS related
scholarly communications also covered under such database providers. Scopus is one of such
database made for the recording of scholarly activities of scientific communities through various
2
prestigious journals. Scholarly publishing is available in open access form as well as print
version also. There are numbers of scholarly mediums to communicate scholarly research output
to the public. “Various disciplines all over the world have witnessed a volcanic growth in their
respective fields in terms of scholarly publications like journals, magazines, conference papers,
trade publications and monographs in both print and non-print forms. Not only developed nations
but the developing nations too from time to time and in a variety of forms have realized the need
and importance of scholarly literature as they bring ideas from masterminds in their respective
fields (Wani et al., 2008).”
2. Literature Review
Tripathi & Garg (2016) studied the publication output of India on cereal crops as reflected in
SCOPUS database from 1965 to 2010 and observed that growth of publication output is highest
in 2010. There was 38.93% research output in the field of rice; and the highest (33.6%)
contribution by India, in domestic & foreign journals, with most of the prolific authors were
from IARI, New Delhi. Singh et al. (2016) analyzed 3529 scholastic output on breast cancer in
India from 2005 to 2014 using Scopus and found that scholastic contribution is increasing since
last 3 years with the highest four authored paper while 80% authors contributed only one paper.
Total 25 core journals have been identified with the highest impact factor of 9.329 and observed
that 11.81% papers were contributed by Indian researchers in collaboration with US researchers.
Patra (2014) traced the citation and authorship pattern of selected LIS journals during 2000-2013
based on Google Scholar. Publish or Perish software was used for analyzing results and found
that Indian LIS journals were not covered in Web of Science whereas their coverage in Scopus
and ISI databases was very limited. Finally, concluded that Indian LIS researchers should focus
more on collaborative research for better visibility and relevance.
Barik & Jena (2014) analyzed 385 articles indexed by SCOPUS database during the period of
2004-2013 to know the growth of LIS research articles of India, and it has been found that
highest number of (80, 20.7%) articles published in 2013 with an annual average growth rate of
16.49%. Two authors collaboration has dominated with highest (43.89%) articles, the degree of
collaboration has ranged from 0.2 to 0.57 with mean value 0.36. Jalal (2013) investigated the
quantitative growth and development of webometric research through the publication output.
There are 154 articles published during the study period and average publication per year was
12.83. The journal “Scientometrics” produced highest papers (37, 24%) on Webometrics and
about 156 authors from more than 30 countries were involved in promoting the field belongs to
80 different institutions of the world. Mooghali et al. (2011) performed a scientometric study of
the global publication in the field of scientometrics during 1980 to 2009. The study reveals that a
total number of 691 contributions related to the Scientometrics were published during the period
and out of 691 articles 183 articles (26.48%) were written by top ten authors of this field. It has
been also declared that 67.87% of the literature was published in the area of Library and
Information Science and states that library professionals have more tendencies to conduct
scientometric studies. The chronological analysis disclosed that the scientific production in the
field of Scientometrics shows a slow increase from 1980 to 2009 and concludes that the share of
scientometric literature is on the rise as drawn from the results.
Hussain & Fatima (2011) analyzed 62 articles of the specific journal and found that the USA has
the highest number of contribution and the journal notably becomes a scholarly journal for LIS
3
professionals. Boell (2007) compiled a comprehensive master list of 1,205 journals publishing
articles relevance to LIS over the last 40 years. A total 968 active journals found mostly
published in English with one-third of the journals from the US and other third from U.K. and
Germany, and nearly 16% of all journals were open access; 11% had ISI-JIF, and 42% were peer
reviewed. Costas & Bordons (2007) found the relationship of H-index with other bibliometric
indicators at the micro-level, analyzed for 337 Spanish Research Council scientists in the area of
“Natural Resources” published during 1994-2004 from Web of Science. The findings indicated
that production of Natural Resources scientists amounted to 6093 documents and productivity
ranged from 1 to 162 documents, while the number of citations ranged from 0 to 2201 and the
number of citations per document from 0 to 40.96. The h-index ranged between 1 and 29. Sin
(2006) analyzed the geographical affiliations of authors in 20 International LIS journals which
were indexed in SSCI to track the longitudinal changes in LIS authorship patterns. USA
contribution was found to be 57%. In 2003, the highest papers were contributed by authors from
51 countries and there were 432 international papers with 703 international authors. Gini co-
efficient of LIS publication distribution was found 0.9890 in 1980 and 0.9527 in 2003. Also
found that high-income countries tend to publish more articles and their publication tends to get
cited more often than those of low-income countries.
3. Scope of the Study
The study is confined to the scientometric assessment of scholarly communications of LIS
research in global scenario based on the Scopus database from 1996 to 2015. Further study is
limited to only top 25 countries in terms of the highest performers in scholarly communications
of LIS during the study period.
4. Objectives of the Study
The objectives of the study are to:
a) Examine the extent of scholarly communications of LIS in global perspective.
b) Examine the overall performance of countries in scholarly communications of LIS by the
contribution of scholarly communications.
c) Find out the extent of citations, self-citations, revised-citations, and citations per
document for scholarly communications of LIS.
d) Examine the overall performance of countries in terms of citation analysis.
e) Find out the h-index of countries in scholarly communications of LIS and assess their
overall performance in terms h-index.
5. Methodology
The study covered only top 25 countries, those producing the highest scholarly communications
in the field of LIS based on Scopus database from 1996 to 2015. There are 171 countries
observed through Scopus for LIS research in the world and majority of them have low
performance in scholarly communications of LIS during the study period, so could not consider
all countries for study purpose. The Scopus database is the largest abstract database in the world,
so consulted for the purpose and objectively data were collected tabulated and processed using
MS-Excel.
6. Data Analysis & Interpretation
a) Performance by Scholarly Communications
4
There are some terms defined that have been used in the study and analysis. These are:
Scholarly Communications (Documents): This includes the research output of the selected
period. All types of scholarly communications (documents) are considered, including citable
scholarly communications (documents) and non-citable scholarly communications (documents).
Citable Scholarly Communications (Documents): This includes the number of citable scholarly
communications (documents) published by a journal in the previous years (selected year
documents are excluded). Exclusively articles, reviews, and conference papers are considered.
Non-citable Scholarly Communications (Documents): This can be obtained by the subtraction of
citable scholarly communications from scholarly communications. Basically, this is current year
research output published by a journal.
Table 1: Quantitative Data for Scholarly Communications with Ranking of Countries (1996-2015)
Country Scholarly Communications
(Documents)
Citable Scholarly
Communications (Documents)
Non-Citable Scholarly
Communications (Documents)
Number % Rank
*
Number % Rank Number % Rank
United States 45047 42.79 1 41709 42.12 1 3338 53.39 1
United Kingdom 10203 9.69 2 9193 9.28 2 1010 16.15 2
China 7902 7.50 3 7823 7.90 3 79 1.26 10
Canada 5021 4.76 4 4669 4.71 4 352 5.63 3
Germany 4663 4.42 5 4432 4.47 5 231 3.69 4
Spain 3447 3.27 6 3343 3.37 6 104 1.66 8
Australia 3421 3.24 7 3242 3.27 7 179 2.86 5
France 2929 2.78 8 2783 2.81 8 146 2.33 6
Taiwan 2568 2.43 9 2530 2.55 9 38 0.60 19
India 2233 2.12 10 2172 2.19 10 61 0.97 14
Netherlands 2133 2.02 11 2015 2.03 11 118 1.88 7
Italy 1726 1.63 12 1658 1.67 12 68 1.08 12
Japan 1483 1.40 13 1406 1.41 13 77 1.23 11
South Korea 1403 1.33 14 1378 1.39 14 25 0.39 21
Brazil 1282 1.21 15 1257 1.26 15 25 0.39 21
Israel 1237 1.17 16 1198 1.20 16 39 0.62 18
Sweden 1123 1.06 17 1069 1.07 18 54 0.86 15
Switzerland 1110 1.05 18 1087 1.09 17 23 0.36 22
Singapore 1106 1.05 19 1065 1.07 19 41 0.65 16
Belgium 968 0.91 20 905 0.91 20 63 1.00 13
Nigeria 906 0.86 21 900 0.90 21 6 0.09 23
Finland 903 0.85 22 876 0.88 22 27 0.43 20
Hong Kong 877 0.83 23 852 0.86 23 25 0.39 21
Austria 803 0.76 24 721 0.72 25 82 1.31 9
South Africa 779 0.73 25 739 0.74 24 40 0.63 17
Total 105273
**
100 99022
#
100 6251
***
100
World Total 118262 111589 6673
*
World rank;
**
89% of world total;
#
88.73% of world total;
***
93.67% of world total
5
From the table 1, we can see that world’s (171 countries) total scholarly communications
(documents) in the field of LIS are 118262 documents as seen through Scopus during 1996-
2015; and top 25 countries (14.61% of world countries) share are 105273 documents that are
89% of world total. It shows that major (89%) scholarly communications in the field of LIS are
contributed by 14.61% countries whereas only 11% scholarly communications are contributed by
85.39% countries of the world. From the observation of Table 1, it has been found that the
United States is the highest contributor of scholarly communications with 45047 documents that
are 42.79% share of a total of top 25 countries, and so got the first rank in world level. The
United Kingdom has contributed 10203 documents that are 9.69% share of a total of top 25
countries, and so in the second rank amongst world countries. Similarly China has contributed
7902 (7.5%) documents with third rank followed by Canada (5021, 4
th
rank), Germany (46643,
5
th
rank), Spain (3447, 6
th
rank), Australia (3421, 7
th
rank), France (2929, 8
th
rank), Taiwan
(2568, 9
th
rank), India (2233, 10
th
rank), Netherlands (2133, 11
th
rank), Italy (1726, 12
th
rank),
Japan (1483, 13
th
rank) and so on. With 2.12% share of documents (2233), India has got 10
th
rank amongst 171 countries of the world in LIS research. From Asia, there are 7 countries in the
list of top 25 LIS research producing countries and China is the highest LIS research producing
country amongst Asian countries with 3
rd
position in the world ranking. From the African
countries, Nigeria is top LIS research contributor with 906 documents (0.86% and 21
st
rank)
whereas South Africa is in 25
th
position with 779 documents (0.73%).
From the observation of Table 1, there are 111589 total citable scholarly communications
(documents) in all over the world in LIS as seen through Scopus during 1996-2015; and top 25
countries total citable contribution is 99022 documents that are 88.73% of world total. It shows
again in case of citable scholarly communications that major (88.73%) citable scholarly
communications in the field of LIS is contributed by 14.61% countries whereas only 11.27%
citable scholarly communications are contributed by 85.39% countries of the world. In the case
of citable scholarly communications, as per observation from Table 1, it has been found that very
little and non-significant changes are there in between total scholarly documents and citable
scholarly documents; and therefore rankings of Sweden & Switzerland has been interchanged
and similar case also found between Austria & South Africa. Though other countries don’t have
any change in their ranking for citable scholarly communications (documents) as it is matching
with total scholarly communications. In citable scholarly communications, United States has
41709 citable documents (42.12% of total citable documents) with first rank followed by United
Kingdom (9193, 9.28%, 2
nd
rank), China (7823, 7.9%, 3
rd
rank), Canada (4669, 4.71%, 4
th
rank),
Germany, Spain, Australia, France, Taiwan, India (2172, 2.19%, 10
th
rank) and so on.
From the observation of Table 1, we have found that there are 6673 total non-citable scholarly
communications (documents) in all over the world in the field of LIS as seen through Scopus
during 1996-2015; and top 25 countries total citable contribution is 6251 documents that are
93.67% of world total. It shows, once more, in the case of non-citable scholarly communications
that major (93.67%) non-citable scholarly communications in the field of LIS are contributed by
14.61% countries whereas only 6.33% non-citable scholarly communications are contributed by
85.39% countries of the world. Further, in the case of non-citable scholarly communications
(documents), as per observation from Table 1, it has been found that various changes in the
rankings of countries in terms of non-citable documents productivity. Though United States
(3338, 53.39%, 1
st
rank) and United Kingdom (1010, 16.15%, 2
nd
rank) don't have any change in
6
their ranking for non-citable scholarly communications as it is matching with total scholarly
communications and citable scholarly communications. In non-citable scholarly communications
category, Canada (352, 5.63%) is in 3
rd
rank followed by Germany (4
th
rank), Australia (5
th
rank), France (6
th
rank), Netherlands (7
th
rank), Spain (8
th
rank), Austria (9
th
rank), China (10
th
rank), India (61, 0.97%, 14
th
rank) and so on. Nigeria found to be the least productive country for
the current year (i.e. 2015) as per Scopus and it was in last position (23
rd
rank) amongst top 25
countries. Interestingly, United States has been produced more than half (53%) of the non-citable
documents that means United States is the highest productive country for LIS research as per
Scopus for the current year (i.e. 2015) followed by the United Kingdom.
b) Performance by Citations to Scholarly Communications
There are some terms defined that have been used in the study and analysis. These are:
Citations: Number of citations received in the selected year by a journal to the documents
published in the three previous years i.e. citations received in year X to documents published in
years X-1, X-2, and X-3. All types of documents are considered.
Self-Citations: Number of journal’s self-citations in the selected year to its own documents
published in the three previous years i.e. self-citations in year X to documents published in years
X-1, X-2, and X-3. All types of documents are considered.
Revised Citations: Number of journal’s outside-citations in the selected year from outside
documents published in the three previous years. This can be obtained by subtraction of self-
citations from citations.
Citations/Document: Average citations per document during the selected period. It is computed
considering the number of citations received by a journal to the documents published during the
study period.
From the table 2, we can observe that world’s (171 countries) total citations to scholarly
communications (documents) in the field of LIS are 1177605 as seen through Scopus during
1996-2015; and top 25 countries share is 1082659 that is about 92% of the world total. It shows
that major (92%) citations to scholarly communications in the field of LIS are obtained by
14.61% countries (top 25 countries) whereas only 8% citations to scholarly communications are
obtained by 85.39% countries of the world. From the observation of Table 2, it has been found
that the United States is the highest citation receiving country with 531923 citations to
documents that are 49% share of total of top 25 countries, and so got first rank in world level
followed by United Kingdom (2
nd
rank with 97932 citations), Canada (3
rd
rank with 55116
citations), Germany (4
th
rank with 41732 citations), Australia (5
th
rank with 31572 citations),
France (6
th
rank with 30773 citations), Netherlands (7
th
rank with 28410 citations), China (8
th
rank with 28120 citations), Israel (9
th
rank with 25984 citations), Italy (10
th
rank with 24168
citations), India (17
th
rank with 13458 citations), and Nigeria (25
th
rank with 1762 citations).
Moreover, citations per documents have also been calculated for each country and it ranges from
21.17 to 1.94 citations per document. In terms of citations per document Switzerland (21.17),
Israel (21.01), and Hong Kong (20.93) are in top 3 countries whereas Nigeria (1.94) is in the last
position and India's citations per document ratio are 6.03 which is more than China (3.56).
7
Table 2 displays the world’s (171 countries) total self-citations to scholarly communications
(documents) in the field of LIS with 354112 self-citations as seen through Scopus during 1996-
2015, and top 25 countries share is 339574 that is about 96% of the world total. It shows that
majority (96%) of self-citations to scholarly communications in the field of LIS were obtained by
14.61% countries (top 25 countries) whereas only 4% self-citations to scholarly communications
were obtained by 85.39% countries of the world.
Table 2: Citations to Scholarly Communications with Ranking of Countries
Country Citations Self-Citations Revised Citations
Number Citation
per
Document
Rank
*
Number Self-
Citation
per
Document
Rank Number Revised
Citation
per
Document
Rank
United States 531923 11.81 1 227768 5.05 1 304155 6.75 1
United Kingdom 97932 9.6 2 24224 2.37 2 73708 7.22 2
Canada 55116 10.98 3 8627 1.72 4 46489 9.25 3
Germany 41732 8.95 4 7556 1.62 5 34176 7.32 4
Australia 31572 9.23 5 5380 1.57 8 26192 7.65 5
France 30773 10.51 6 5562 1.89 7 25211 8.60 6
Netherlands 28410 13.32 7 4242 1.98 11 24168 11.33 7
China 28120 3.56 8 13527 1.71 3 14593 1.84 12
Israel 25984 21.01 9 3844 3.1 12 22140 17.89 8
Italy 24168 14 10 4283 2.48 10 19885 11.52 10
Switzerland 23502 21.17 11 2366 2.13 15 21136 19.04 9
Spain 19596 5.68 12 6667 1.93 6 12929 3.75 14
Taiwan 18680 7.27 13 4651 1.81 9 14029 5.46 13
Hong Kong 18357 20.93 14 1623 1.85 19 16734 19.08 11
Sweden 14229 12.67 15 1843 1.64 18 12386 11.03 15
Singapore 13666 12.36 16 1408 1.27 21 12258 11.08 16
India 13458 6.03 17 3417 1.53 13 10041 4.49 19
Belgium 12651 13.07 18 1969 2.03 17 10682 11.04 17
Japan 12607 8.5 19 3035 2.04 14 9572 6.45 21
South Korea 12482 8.9 20 2254 1.6 16 10228 7.29 18
Finland 11270 12.48 21 1619 1.79 20 9651 10.68 20
Austria 5974 7.44 22 895 1.11 23 5079 6.32 22
South Africa 4401 5.65 23 852 1.09 24 3549 4.55 23
Brazil 4294 3.35 24 1263 0.98 22 3031 2.36 24
Nigeria 1762 1.94 25 699 0.77 25 1063 1.17 25
Total 1082659
@
339574
#
743085
&
World Total 1177605 354112 823493
*
World rank;
@
91.93% of world total;
#
95.89% of world total;
&
90.23% of world total
From the observation of Table 2, it has been found that the United States is again the highest in
self-citations with 227768 self-citations to documents that are 67% share of total of top 25
countries, and so got first rank in world level followed by United Kingdom (2
nd
rank with 24224
self-citations), China (3
rd
rank with 13527 self-citations), Canada (4
th
rank with 8627 self-
citations), Germany (5
th
rank with 7556 self-citations), Spain (6
th
rank with 6667 self-citations),
France (7
th
rank with 5562 self-
citations), India (13
(25
th
rank with 699 self-
citations). Further, citations per document for self
calculated for each count
ry and it ranges from 5.05 to 0.77 self
States (5.05), Israel (3.1) and Italy (2.48) are in top 3 countries, in terms of self
document ratio whereas Nigeria (0.77) is in the last position in this category also;
self-
citations per document ratio is 1.53 which is less than China (1.71
Furtherm
ore, Table 2 displays the world’
communications (docume
nts) in the field of LIS with 823
Scopus during 1996-2015; a
nd top 25 countries share is 7
total. It demonstrates that majority (90%) of revised
field of LIS were obtained by top 25 countri
communications were obtained by rest of the countries of the world. From the examination of
Table 2, it has been found that the United States is again the highest in revised
304155 revised-c
itations to documents that are 40.93% share of total of top 25 countries, and so
got first rank in world level followed by United Kingdom (2
citations), Canada (3
rd
rank with 46489 revised
citations), Australia (5
th
rank with 26192 revised
citations), India (19
th
rank with 10041 revised
revised-
citations). In this regard, citations per docume
calculated for each country and it ranges from 19.08 to 1.17. Hong Kong (19.08), Switzerland
(19.04), and Israel (17.89) are in top 3 countries, in terms of revised
whereas Nigeria (1.17) is i
n the last position and India’s revised
4.49 which is more than China (1.84).
Fig. 1: Total citations of top 25 countries in LIS
United Kingdom
9%
Canada
5%
Germany
4%
Australia
3%
citations), India (13
th
rank with 3417 self-
citations), and Nigeria
citations). Further, citations per document for self
-
citations have been
ry and it ranges from 5.05 to 0.77 self
-
citations per document. United
States (5.05), Israel (3.1) and Italy (2.48) are in top 3 countries, in terms of self
document ratio whereas Nigeria (0.77) is in the last position in this category also;
citations per document ratio is 1.53 which is less than China (1.71
).
ore, Table 2 displays the world’
s (171 countries) total revised-
citations to scholarly
nts) in the field of LIS with 823
493 revised-citati
ons as seen through
nd top 25 countries share is 7
43085 that is about 90% of the world
total. It demonstrates that majority (90%) of revised
-
citations to scholarly communications in the
field of LIS were obtained by top 25 countri
es whereas only 10% revised-
citations to scholarly
communications were obtained by rest of the countries of the world. From the examination of
Table 2, it has been found that the United States is again the highest in revised
itations to documents that are 40.93% share of total of top 25 countries, and so
got first rank in world level followed by United Kingdom (2
nd
rank with 73708 revised
rank with 46489 revised
-citations), Germany (4
th
rank with 34176
rank with 26192 revised
-citations), China (12
th
rank with 14593 revised
rank with 10041 revised
-citations), and Nigeria (25
th
citations). In this regard, citations per docume
nt for revised-
citations have been
calculated for each country and it ranges from 19.08 to 1.17. Hong Kong (19.08), Switzerland
(19.04), and Israel (17.89) are in top 3 countries, in terms of revised
-
citations per document ratio
n the last position and India’s revised
-
citations per document ratio is
4.49 which is more than China (1.84).
Fig. 1: Total citations of top 25 countries in LIS
United States
49%
Australia
France
3%
Netherlands
3%
China
3% Israel
2%
Italy
2%
Switzerland
2%
Spain
2%
Taiwan
2%
Hong Kong
2%
Singapore
1%
India
1%
Belgium
1%
Japan
1%
Finland
1%
Austria
Brazil
0%
Nigeria
8
citations), and Nigeria
citations have been
citations per document. United
States (5.05), Israel (3.1) and Italy (2.48) are in top 3 countries, in terms of self
-citations per
document ratio whereas Nigeria (0.77) is in the last position in this category also;
and India’s
citations to scholarly
ons as seen through
43085 that is about 90% of the world
citations to scholarly communications in the
citations to scholarly
communications were obtained by rest of the countries of the world. From the examination of
Table 2, it has been found that the United States is again the highest in revised
-citations with
itations to documents that are 40.93% share of total of top 25 countries, and so
rank with 73708 revised
-
rank with 34176
revised-
rank with 14593 revised
-
rank with 1063
citations have been
calculated for each country and it ranges from 19.08 to 1.17. Hong Kong (19.08), Switzerland
citations per document ratio
citations per document ratio is
Sweden
1%
Singapore
1%
Japan
1%
South
Korea
1%
Austria
1%
South
Africa
0%
Nigeria
0%
9
From the observation of Figure 1, it has been found that from the total citations to top 25
countries, United States (US) share is 49% which divides the whole world into two divisions
where the US is on one side and other 24 countries another side. United Kingdom (9%) has the
second highest number of citations after the US. Canada and Germany have 5% and 4% share of
citations respectively. Australia, France, Netherlands and China, each have 3% share of citations
individually. India has only 1% share of citations whereas Brazil, South Africa, and Nigeria have
less than 1% share of citations. From the analysis, it has been established that majority of
citations belongs to American and European countries whereas Asian, Australian and African
countries are far behind. Amongst Asian countries, China is representing much better than other
countries whereas the position of India is not satisfactory. South Africa and Nigeria are only
representing from African continent though their position of research and citations are not
satisfactory also.
c) Performance of Countries by h-index
The h-index was introduced by Hirsch (2005). It calculates the quality as well as quantity of the
impact of a researcher’s publication.
Fig. 2: h-index of top 25 countries in LIS
Figure 2 demonstrates the h-index metrics for top 25 countries of the world as seen through
Scopus in the field of LIS. Ranks have been assigned to every country as per their h-index
performance recorded by Scopus during 1996-2015. In this regard, United States has the highest
h-index (242) and achieved the 1
st
position. United Kingdom is in 2
nd
position with (108 h-
index), followed by Canada (3
rd
position with 89 h-index), Germany (4
th
position with 72 h-
242
108
89
72
71
70
69
69
68
61
58
55
55
54
53
52
51
51
51
48
47
38302715
0
50
100
150
200
250
United States
United Kingdom
Canada
Germany
Switzerland
Australia
France
Netherlands
Israel
Italy
China
Taiwan
Hong KongFinland
Singapore
Sweden
Spain
Japan
Belgium
South Korea
India
Austria
Brazil
South Africa
Nigeria
10
index), Switzerland (5
th
position with 71 h-index), Australia (6
th
position with 70 h-index), China
(10
th
position with 58 h-index), India (17
th
position with 47 h-index) and Nigeria (21
st
position
with 15 h-index). France and Netherlands have 7
th
ranks with same h-index (69). Similarly,
Taiwan and Hong Kong with 55 h-index are in the 11
th
position whereas Spain, Japan, and
Belgium with 51 h-index are in 15
th
position amongst top 25 countries. In the category of more
than 100 h-index, there are only 2 countries (The United States and the United Kingdom)
whereas 17 countries are in the range between 99-50 h-index; and 6 countries have less than 50
h-index including India also. Nigeria has the lowest h-index value (15).
7. Findings of the Study
The study has observed some interesting findings which are as follows:
a) The world’s total scholarly communications in the field of LIS is 118262 documents as
seen through Scopus during 1996-2015 and top 25 countries share is 105273 documents
(89% of world total). The United States is the highest contributor of scholarly
communications with 45047 documents (42.79% share of top 25 countries) followed by
United Kingdom (10203, 9.69%). China contributed 7902 scholarly documents (3
rd
rank
amongst world level, 7.5%) and first rank in the Asian region. With 2.12% share of
documents (2233), India has got 10
th
rank amongst the world in LIS research and 3
rd
rank
in the Asian region. There are 7 countries in the list of top 25 LIS research producing
countries from Asia. Nigeria is the top LIS research contributor with 906 documents
(0.86% and 21
st
rank).
b) Out of 111589 total citable scholarly documents, top 25 countries total citable document
share is 99022 documents (88.73% of world total).
c) There are 6673 total non-citable scholarly documents, out of which top 25 countries share
is 6251 documents (93.67% of world total). United States is the top contributor for non-
citable documents (1
st
rank, 3338, 53.39%) followed by United Kingdom (2
nd
rank, 1010,
16.15%), Canada (3
rd
rank, 352, 5.63%), China (10
th
rank), and India (14
th
rank, 61,
0.97%). Nigeria is the least productive country for non-citable documents as per Scopus
with (23
rd
rank) amongst top 25 countries.
d) The world’s (171 countries) total citations to scholarly communications (documents) in
the field of LIS is 1177605 and top 25 countries share is 1082659 (92% of the world
total). United States is the highest citation receiving country with 531923 citations to
documents (49% share of total of top 25 countries) followed by United Kingdom (2
nd
rank, 97932 citations), Canada (3
rd
rank, 55116 citations), China (8
th
rank, 28120
citations), India (17
th
rank, 13458 citations), and Nigeria (25
th
rank, 1762 citations).
e) Switzerland (21.17), Israel (21.01), and Hong Kong (20.93) are in the top 3 countries for
citations per document ratio whereas Nigeria (1.94) is in the last position and India's
citations per document ratio are 6.03 which is more than China (3.56).
f) The world’s (171 countries) total self-citations to scholarly communications (documents)
in the field of LIS is 354112 and top 25 countries share is 339574 (96% of the world
total). The United States is the highest in self-citations (227768 self-citations) that are
67% share of top 25 countries followed by United Kingdom (2
nd
rank, 24224 self-
citations), China (3
rd
rank, 13527 self-citations), India (13
th
rank, 3417 self-citations), and
Nigeria (25
th
rank, 699 self-citations). United States (5.05), Israel (3.1) and Italy (2.48)
are in the top 3 countries in terms of self-citations per document ratio. India’s self-
citations per document ratio is 1.53 which is less than China (1.71).
11
g) The world’s (171 countries) total revised-citations to scholarly communications
(documents) in the field of LIS is 823493 and top 25 countries share is 743085 (90% of
the world total). United States is the highest in revised-citations (304155 revised-
citations) that are 40.93% share of top 25 countries followed by United Kingdom (2
nd
rank, 73708 revised-citations), Canada (3
rd
rank, 46489 revised-citations), China (12
th
rank, 14593 revised-citations), India (19
th
rank, 10041 revised-citations), and Nigeria
(25
th
rank, 1063 revised-citations). Hong Kong (19.08), Switzerland (19.04), and Israel
(17.89) are in the top 3 countries in terms of revised-citations per document ratio. Nigeria
(1.17) is in the last position and India’s revised-citations per document ratio is 4.49 which
is more than China (1.84).
h) From the total citations to top 25 countries, United States share is 49% which divides the
world into two divisions where the US is on one side and other 24 countries another side.
United Kingdom (9%) has the second highest number of citations after the United States.
China has 3% share of citations whereas India has only 1% share of citations. The
majority of citations belongs to American and European countries whereas Asian,
Australian and African countries are far behind. Amongst Asian countries, China is
leading whereas the position of India is not satisfactory.
i) The United States has the highest h-index (242) amongst world countries followed by
United Kingdom (2
nd
position, 108 h-index), Canada (3
rd
position, 89 h-index), China
(10
th
position, 58 h-index), India (17
th
position, 47 h-index) and Nigeria (21
st
position, 15
h-index).
8. Conclusions
From the study, it is evident that LIS research, in the form of scholarly communications, is
growing positively. The Scopus is the only database in the world that includes the majority of
LIS journals and thus records major LIS scholarly communications. The top 25 countries of the
world have the record of 89% scholarly communications in the field of LIS. In terms of citable
scholarly communications and non-citable scholarly communications, the majority of the share
(more than 88%) belongs to top 25 countries of the world. The United States is the leading
country in terms of scholarly communications, citable scholarly communications, and non-
citable scholarly communications. The United Kingdom is following the United States in this
regard. China's contribution to LIS is ranked 3
rd
at world level whereas leading in Asia. India’s
scholarly communications to LIS has been ranked 10
th
amongst world level and 3
rd
in the Asia.
Amongst the top 25 countries in LIS, 12 countries belong to Europe, 7 from Asia, 2 from Africa,
2 from North America, 1 from South America, and 1 from Australia. United Kingdom is the
leading country for LIS research from Europe. Similarly China from Asia, the United States from
North America, Brazil from South America, Nigeria from Africa, and Australia itself from the
Australian region.
Citations to the scholarly communications display its prestige and reputation. The top 25
countries in LIS research share 92% of citations whereas rests of the countries have only 8%
citations to their scholarly communications. The citation data itself shows the quality of scholarly
communications contributed by top 25 countries. Self-citations and revised-citations share have
also been found more than 90% for top 25 countries. The United States is again leading in terms
of total citations, self-citations, and revised-citations followed by the United Kingdom. China's
citation records are much better than India whereas Nigeria is the last in terms of total citations,
12
self-citations, and revised-citations. Citation ratio per document found to best for Switzerland
whereas the United States and the United Kingdom are far behind. Nigeria records worst citation
ratio per document whereas India’s citations per document ratio are far better than China.
The United States has 49% share of citations from the total citations to top 25 countries and thus
bifurcates into two groups i.e. the United States in one side and rests of 24 countries another side.
Thus from the study, it is evident that the United States scholarly communications are much
better than rests of the countries. The United Kingdom is the second highest citations receiving
country after the United States whereas China and India’s share are 3% and 1% respectively. The
study reflects that American and European countries are leading in citations whereas Asian,
Australian and African countries are far behind. Amongst Asian countries, China is leading in
citations whereas the status of India is not satisfactory. The h-index is another measure to judge
the scientific value of scholarly communications based on citations data. The h-index values
again proved that United States is leading in LIS research followed by the United Kingdom, and
Canada. Asian countries, China and India are in 10
th
and 17
th
position respectively which shows
the status of their scholarly communications in the field of LIS. Nigeria and South Africa are in
the last positions in terms of h-index but they are only the representatives of African countries in
LIS research. Finally, we can say that United States is the global master for LIS research in the
world and rests of the countries are only following.
References
Barik, N. & Jena, P. (2014). Growth of LIS research articles in India seen through Scopus: a
bibliometric analysis. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal), paper 1133.
Retrieved on March 30, 2017, from http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/1133
Boell, S. K. (2007). A scientometric method to analyze scientific journals as exemplified by the
area of information science [Master Dissertation]. Germany: Saarland University.
Retrieved on March 30, 2017, from http://www.researchgate.net/publication/28801098
Costas, R. & Bordons, M. (2007). The h index: advantages, limitations and its relation with other
bibliometric indicators at the micro level. Journal of Informetrics, 1, 193-203.
Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(46), 16569-
16572.
Hussain, A. & Fatima, N. (2011). A bibliometric analysis of the ‘Chinese Librarianship: an
international electronic journal (2006-2010). 31. Retrieved March 25, 2017, from
http/www.iclc.us/cliej/cl31hf.pdf.
Jalal, S. K. (2013). Scientometric mapping on Webometrics: a global perspective. INFOLIB, 6(1-
2), 22-27.
Kauffer, D. S. & Carley, K. M. (1993). The influence of print on sociocultural organization and
change. In Scholarly Communication – Historical Development and New Possibilities.
IATUL Proceedings.
13
Mooghali, A., Alijani, R., Karami, N., & Khasseh, A. (2011). Scientometric analysis of the
scientometric literature. International Journal of Information Science and Management,
9(1), 19-31.
Patra, S. K. (2014). Google Scholar based citation analysis of Indian library and information
science journals. Annals of Library and Information Studies, 61(3), 227-234.
Saroja, G. (2016). Changing face of scholarly communication and its impact on Library and
Information Centres. In Munigal, Achala (Ed.) Scholarly communication and the publish
or perish pressures of academia (pp. 100-117). IGI Global: Hershey, USA.
Sin, S. J. (2006). Are Library and Information Science journals becoming more
internationalized? a longitudinal study of author’s geographical affiliations in 20 LIS
journals from 1981 to 2003. In: 68
th
Annual Meeting of the American Society for
Information Science & Technology. DOI:10.1002/meet.14504201201
Singh, N., Handa, T. S., Kumar, D., & Singh, G. (2016). Mapping of breast cancer research in
India: a bibliometric analysis. Current Science, 110(7), 1178-1183. DOI:
10.18520/cs/v110/i7/1178-1183
Tripathi, H. K. & Garg, K. C. (2016). Scientometrics of cereal crop science research in India as
seen through SCOPUS database during 1965-2010. Annals of Library and Information
Studies, 63(3), 222-231.
Wani, Z. A., Bakshi, I M., & Gul, Sameer. (2008). Growth and development of Library and
Information Science literature. Chinese Librarianship: an International Electronic
Journal, 26, pp. 1-13.
