LIS Research in Pakistan: An Analysis of Pakistan Library and Information Science Journal 1998-2007

Abstract

This article reports the results of an analysis of literature published in Pakistan Library andInformation Science Journal (PLISJ) during 1998-2007. Various characteristics of literature were analyzed to observe prevailing trends in Library and Information Science (LIS) research in Pakistan. Analysis includes subject covered in articles published in PLISJ; geographic distribution of authors; country of origin of authors; collaboration among authors; contributions to literature on the basis of gender; type of research; language of the article and publication output of PLISJ. Results of the study are compared to previous studies and some recommendations are given for the advancement of LIS research in Pakistan.

Full text

“LIS Research in Pakistan: An Analysis of Pakistan Library and Information Science Journal 1998-2007,” Mirza Muhammad Naseer,
Dr. Khalid Mahmood. Library Philosophy and Practice 2009 (June)
1
Library Philosophy and Practice 2009
ISSN 1522-0222
LIS Research in Pakistan: An Analysis of Pakistan Library and
Information Science Journal 1998-2007
Mirza Muhammad Naseer
Librarian
Institute of Space Technology
Islamabad, Pakistan
Dr. Khalid Mahmood
Chairman, Department of Library and Information Science
University of the Punjab
Lahore, Pakistan
Introduction
Pakistan has a long history of library research which starts as early as 1916 when Asa Don
Dickinson wrote the Punjab Library Primer for library training classes at the University of the Punjab,
Lahore (Kaser, 1992). This was the first ever textbook written outside the United States in the field of
Library Science. Since then this tradition has continued and LIS professionals have been regularly
contributing to library and information science literature. A number of journals and magazines emerged in
Pakistan from time to time but could not continue due to variety of problems.
Pakistan Library & Information Science Journal (PLISJ), which was known as Pakistan Library
Bulletin (PLB) till 2003, is the only journal in the field of library and information science which has survived
despite the hardships of the time and is being continuously published by Library Promotion Bureau since
1968 (Khan & Samdani, 1997). It started as an irregular publication in 1966 but changed to a regular
quarterly publication in September 1968 (Haider, 1988). Dr. G. A. Sabzwari was its founding chief editor
and he is still performing this work. Mr. M. Adil Usmani also worked as its chief editor (Samdani, 1998). A
total of 38 volumes (102 issues) of PLISJ/PLB have been published till December 2007.
PLISJ has played an important role in keeping the library professionals aware of latest national
and international issues. It has also helped LIS community in Pakistan and abroad to disseminate their
professional ideas and knowledge through their writings. It published special issues on different
occasions to emphasize on the topics of current interest for Pakistani librarianship (Usmani, 1995).
Articles published in PLISJ portrayed the changing situation of librarianship in Pakistan over the years. It
is the major source of information for anyone who wants to know about librarianship in Pakistan during
last four decades. Its progress was in line with the professional growth of the country. It faced problems
when Pakistani librarianship was at its low pace and it flourished when Pakistani librarianship did well.
Therefore, systematic analysis of PLISJ can reveal trends in Pakistani librarianship.
Analysis of PLISJ was considered essential to understand the trends in LIS research in Pakistan.
An analysis of the subject covered and authorship characteristics of literature published in Pakistan
Library & Information Science Journal during 1998-2007 have been presented in this study. Type of
research publications, language of the articles and publication output of PLISJ has also been analyzed.

“LIS Research in Pakistan: An Analysis of Pakistan Library and Information Science Journal 1998-2007,” Mirza Muhammad Naseer,
Dr. Khalid Mahmood. Library Philosophy and Practice 2009 (June)
2
Literature Review
A review of related literature reveals that a number of authors have presented the results of the
analysis of library and information science literature in different countries. For example, Khan & Samdani
(1997) analyzed the literature published in Pakistan Library Bulletin (PLB) during 1968-1997. They
presented subject review of the literature along with authorship characteristics and analysis of citations.
Major areas of interest for the authors of PLB, according to this study, were academic libraries,
librarianship, information and computer technology, bibliography and bibliographical control.
Mahmood (1996) presented a statistical and subjective review of the status of Library and
Information Services in Pakistan by analyzing journal articles written on Pakistani librarianship in foreign
journals. Findings of this study show that the most popular subject among the authors on Pakistani
Librarianship in foreign journals was Library and Information Science education. This study also
presented various authorship characteristics for the articles included in the analysis.
Kajberg (1996) conducted a content analysis of Danish LIS serial literature to determine the
subject focus of the literature from 1957-1986. Analysis of two non-research journals, Bibliotek 70 and
Bogens Verden, was conducted. The most popular subject area in the profession was Individual
Libraries/National Library System, or the geographical viewpoint on libraries and library systems. Area of
major concern in the profession was Cooperation, Networks, and Resource Sharing. This study reveals
that theoretical aspects of librarianship and information science received little attention.
Tiew (2006) explored the authorship characteristics in Sekitar Perpustakaan, one of the LIS
periodicals published from Malaysia, during 1994-2003. The results of this study discovered that 79%
articles were written by single author and female authors dominated by contributing 65.74% articles.
Tiew, Abrizah & Kiran (2002) carried out a bibliometric examination of the articles published in
Malaysian Journal of Library and Information Science during 1996-2000 and found that the percentage of
multi-authored articles was slightly higher than the single authored articles. The most popular subject,
according to this study, was scientific and professional publishing.
Alemna (1996) analyzed the articles published in The African Journal of Library, Archives and
Information Science (AJLAIS) during 1990-1995 and found that the major areas of interest were
information technology, rural libraries and status/image of librarians. The study noted an increase in
publications from Africa and increase in number of female contributors.
Ocholla & Ocholla (2007) investigated the research in LIS in South Africa during 1993-2006 and
observed that research collaboration through co-authorship was encouraging at 69 percent. According to
the results of this study management, information retrieval and information services dominated the LIS
research in South Africa.
Zemon & Bahr (1998) examined the articles published by college librarians in two journals,
College & Research Libraries and Journal of Academic Librarianship, during 1986-1996 and concluded
that college librarians contributed less number of articles to professional literature than their counterparts
in universities. Study shows that college librarians wrote less about technology, systems-related issues
and cataloging. Roughly equal number of articles was contributed by both male and female authors.
Buttlar (1999) conducted a citation analysis of 61 library science and information science
dissertations to acquire knowledge about the Information Sources used in LIS doctoral research. Analysis
showed that about 80% of citations were to single authors and that LIS scholars relied heavily on journal
literature for their research.

“LIS Research in Pakistan: An Analysis of Pakistan Library and Information Science Journal 1998-2007,” Mirza Muhammad Naseer,
Dr. Khalid Mahmood. Library Philosophy and Practice 2009 (June)
3
Objective
The objectives of this study, covering the period 1998-2007, were:
To analyze LIS literature published in PLISJ so that areas of interest for LIS researchers and
current trends may be explored.
To examine authorship characteristics of LIS literature published in PLISJ.
To know the publication output of PLISJ.
To study the type of research and language of articles published in PLISJ.
Significance
Professional development of a country in any field can be gauged through the literature produced
in that field. As PLISJ published major part of LIS research output during the period of the study, analysis
of this research output is important to understand status of LIS research in Pakistan. Results of this study
will help the researchers to identify the prevailing trends and interests of LIS researchers in Pakistan.
Areas of least interest can be focused for future research so that all areas of the profession can progress
concurrently. Results for the growth of library and information science literature published in PLISJ will
illustrate how library and information profession has progressed over the years in Pakistan.
Finally, some recommendations have been made for the promotion and encouragement of library
and information science research in Pakistan on the basis of the findings of this study. These
recommendations will help in improving the future LIS research in Pakistan.
Methodology
A total of 236 articles from 30 issues of PLISJ (formerly PLB) were examined for subjects
covered, geographic distribution of authors, country of origin of authors, collaboration among authors, and
gender of authors. Research type, language of articles and publication output of PLISJ were also
analyzed. An identification and coding frame was prepared for identification and reliable coding of articles
to be analyzed. Data were then entered in SPSS software and analyzed to observe different
characteristics of the published literature.
Different classification schemes including DDC, LC Classification, JITA and a number of
classification schemes prepared by individuals for their studies were considered for subject categorization
of the articles. It was noted that JITA provided comprehensive classification of different LIS subjects and
at the same time it was found very simple. It was, therefore, decided to use JITA for subject
categorization of articles in this study.
Porto & Marchitelli (2006) explain that JITA is the acronym of the names of authors (Jose Manuel
Barrueco Cruz, Imma Subirats Coll, Thomas Krichel and Antonella De Robbio) of the scheme. It is a
specialized scheme for LIS field and was created to classify the documents of E-LIS (E-prints in Library
and Information Science). In this scheme LIS subjects have been divided into 12 main categories which
are further divided into more than 120 sub categories.
Limits of the Study
This study was limited to subjects covered and authorship characteristics of the literature
published in PLISJ during 1998-2007. Besides this, type of research, language of the articles and
publication out of PLISJ were also examined. News & Views, book reviews, and editorials were not
included in the study.

“LIS Research in Pakistan: An Analysis of Pakistan Library and Information Science Journal 1998-2007,” Mirza Muhammad Naseer,
Dr. Khalid Mahmood. Library Philosophy and Practice 2009 (June)
4
Results and Discussion
Analysis of data discovered some interesting trends in LIS research in Pakistan. It was observed
that fewer articles were published during 1998-2002 and mostly combined issues were published
whereas number of articles increased and publication of the issues was regular during 2003-2007. On
average, 7.87 articles per issue and 23.60 articles per year were published during the period under study.
Other results and a brief discussion are presented in the following paragraphs.
Table 1. Ranked List of Subjects Covered in PLISJ (1998-2007)
Rank
Subject Categories
Frequency
Percentage
1
Industry, profession and education
93
39.4
2
Libraries as physical collections
42
17.8
3
Information technology and library technology
24
10.2
4
Theoretical and general aspects of libraries and information
15
6.4
5
Users, literacy and reading
14
5.9
6
Information sources, supports, channels
10
4.2
7
Technical services in libraries, archives, museum
9
3.8
8
Information treatment for information services
8
3.4
8
Management
8
3.4
9
Publishing and legal issues
7
3.0
10
Information use and sociology of information
5
2.1
11
Housing technologies
1
0.4
Total
236
100.0
Table 1 shows that the most popular subject category among the authors of PLISJ is “Industry,
profession and education” with 93 articles out of 236 (39.4%) followed by “Libraries as physical
collections” with 42 articles (17.8%) and “Information technology and library technology” with 24 articles
(10.2%). Other categories received little attention of the authors. These results are similar to the results of
the study conducted by Mahmood (1996) where “Library and Information Science education” was found
as the most popular subject.
Management (3.4%); Publishing and legal issues (3.0%); Information use and sociology of
information (2.1%) and Housing technologies (0.4%) were found to be the subjects of least interest for
authors of the journal. This result shows a trend opposite to the one observed by Ocholla & Ocholla
(2007). They found management as the dominant area of LIS research in South Africa.
The result of this study illustrates that PLISJ authors are writing comprehensively about their
profession so that fellow professionals remain aware of different developments in the profession. Result
for “Information technology and library technology” (10.2%) is not very much encouraging in the age of
information and communication technologies. Information technology was found as the most popular
subject in the study conducted by Alemna (1996). However, when we compare these results to the results
presented by Khan & Samdani (1997), we see almost 200% increase (10.2% from 5.13%) in this category
of literature which is very encouraging.
Table 2 shows that most contributions to PLISJ (69.9%) came from the Asian countries followed
by authors from North America (5.1%). One article was jointly written by authors from Asia and Europe.
The journal could not get much attention of the authors from other parts of the world. Geographic details
for authors of 54 articles (22.9%) were not available.

“LIS Research in Pakistan: An Analysis of Pakistan Library and Information Science Journal 1998-2007,” Mirza Muhammad Naseer,
Dr. Khalid Mahmood. Library Philosophy and Practice 2009 (June)
5
Table 2. Geographic Distribution of Authors
Geographic Area
Frequency
Percentage
Asia
165
69.9
North America
12
5.1
Europe
4
1.7
Asia and Europe
1
0.4
Not available
54
22.9
Total
236
100.0
Table 3. Country of Origin of the Authors
Country
Frequency
Percentage
Pakistan
158
66.9
USA
10
4.2
Saudi Arabia
5
2.1
U.K.
4
1.7
Canada
2
0.8
Kuwait
1
0.4
Bangladesh
1
0.4
Pakistan and U.K.
1
0.4
Not available
54
22.9
Total
236
100.0
When we go into further details for authors' location (Table 3), we find that Pakistani authors are
dominant in PLISJ with 158 articles (66.9%) followed by American authors (4.2%). This trend is due to the
fact that PLISJ is a Pakistani journal and it supports Pakistani LIS researchers in publishing. This trend
was supported by the study of Ocholla & Ocholla (2007) which reported that South African authors largely
published in local journals.
When we analyze the state of collaboration among authors of PLISJ (Table 4), we observe that
they prefer individual work as 209 articles (88.6%) out of total 236 were written by a single author. Only
17 articles (7.2%) were jointly written by two authors. At five occasions (2.1%) authorship details were not
available.
Table 4. State of Collaboration among Authors Contributing to PLISJ
Number of Collaborating Authors
Frequency
Percentage
Single Author
209
88.6
Two Authors
17
7.2
Three Authors
4
1.7
Four Authors
1
0.4
Not Known
5
2.1
Total
236
100.0

“LIS Research in Pakistan: An Analysis of Pakistan Library and Information Science Journal 1998-2007,” Mirza Muhammad Naseer,
Dr. Khalid Mahmood. Library Philosophy and Practice 2009 (June)
6
This trend of working single-handedly is in conformity with the results of previous studies like
Tiew (2006) and Buttlar (1999). It also does not seem very strange keeping in view that male-female
interaction is not very common in higher education institutions in Pakistan.
Analysis revealed that male authors dominated the LIS research scene in Pakistan with 144
(61%) contributions (Table 5). Both male and female authors joined hands to write only nine articles
(3.8%). Gender of the author could not be determined for seven articles (3.0%). Five articles were found
without author details while this author was unable to determine the gender of two authors due to
unfamiliar names.
Table 5. Articles Contributed on the Basis of Author's Gender
Gender
Frequency
Percentage
Male
144
61.0
Female
76
32.2
Both (Male & Female)
9
3.8
Cannot determine
7
3.0
Total
236
100.0
Comparison of this result with that of Khan & Samdani (1997) reveals that contribution to PLISJ
from female authors has increased considerably (from 8.89% to 32.2%). It highlights that female LIS
professionals are now taking active part in research activities resulting in increased number of
publications from them. These results are in accordance with the findings of Alemna (1996).
Tiew (2006) found results opposite to the results of this study i.e. female author contributed more
than male authors in Malaysian journal Sekitar Perpustakaan. However, he acknowledged that his finding
differ much from the previous studies. Buttlar (1999) also observed results similar to this study.
Major part of PLISJ comprises of descriptive articles (Table 6) with 144 articles (61%) followed by
historical research based articles (17.8%). Writings based on empirical research accounted for 12.3%
only. These findings differ a great deal from that of Tiew et al (2002) where 69.74% of articles were
research oriented.
Table 6. Articles Published by Type of Research
Type of Research
Frequency
Percentage
Descriptive
144
61.0
Historical
42
17.8
Empirical
29
12.3
Case Study
21
8.9
Total
236
100.0
Comparison of these results with that of Khan & Samdani (1997) shows that percentage of
descriptive writings in PLISJ has decreased (from 77.27% to 61%) in last decade while percentage of
articles based on empirical research has increased (from 4.15% to 12.3%). It is definitely a healthy sign
for LIS profession in Pakistan and needs to continue in future also. Proportion of case studies has
decreased (from 13.43% to 8.9%) during the last decade.

“LIS Research in Pakistan: An Analysis of Pakistan Library and Information Science Journal 1998-2007,” Mirza Muhammad Naseer,
Dr. Khalid Mahmood. Library Philosophy and Practice 2009 (June)
7
PLISJ published articles in English and Urdu languages. Two third (65.7%) of them were in
English while one third (34.3%) were in Urdu (Table 7). This trend is due to the reason that medium of
instruction at higher education level in Pakistan is English and most of LIS literature available in Pakistan
is also in English language. Though it is the second official language of Pakistan but most of the office
work is done in it. Therefore, authors feel comfortable to write in English.
Table 7. Distribution of Articles Published by Language
Language
Frequency
Percentage
English
155
65.7
Urdu
81
34.3
Total
236
100.0
The comparison of the result with that of Khan & Samdani (1997) discloses that percentage of
articles published in PLISJ in Urdu (Pakistan's national language) in last 10 years has increased from
23.51% to 34.3%.
PLISJ published a total of 236 articles during 1998-2007 at the rate of 7.87 articles per issue and
23.6 articles per year (Table 8). It published 67 articles in 10 issues during first five years of the study
(1998-2002) while 169 articles were published in 20 issues during last five years (2003-2007). A sharp
increase was observed during last two years which accounted for 85 articles (36%).
This result is fairly understandable because LIS profession in Pakistan is facing a number of
problems and research is not an easy job here. These problems have been discussed in detail by Haider
(1978), Anwar (1981) and Asghar (1992). However, sharp increase in articles contributed to PLISJ may
be attributed to the efforts of Higher Education Commission (HEC) to promote research culture in
Pakistan and the commencement of M. Phil and PhD programs at University of the Punjab in Lahore and
University of Karachi in Karachi.
Table 8
Publication Output of PLISJ (1998-2007)
Year of Publication
Frequency
Percentage
1998
10
4.2
1999
13
5.5
2000
18
7.6
2001
14
5.9
2002
12
5.1
2003
31
13.1
2004
26
11.0
2005
27
11.4
2006
48
20.3
2007
37
15.7
Total
236
100.0

“LIS Research in Pakistan: An Analysis of Pakistan Library and Information Science Journal 1998-2007,” Mirza Muhammad Naseer,
Dr. Khalid Mahmood. Library Philosophy and Practice 2009 (June)
8
Conclusion
The results of this study provide insight into different characteristics of literature published in
PLISJ during 1998-2007. On the basis of these results we can conclude that the most popular subject
area for the authors of PLISJ is “Industry, profession and education” and they are now contributing more
articles on Information technology. Housing technologies (Resources Centre, Library archive and
museum buildings, Furniture, Vehicles and Safety etc) is the most neglected area of LIS research in
Pakistan.
Mostly Asian authors, predominantly Pakistanis, contribute to the journal. The state of
collaboration among authors of PLISJ is not very encouraging as majority of the authors prefer to work in
isolation. Male authors lead the LIS research scene but contributions from female authors have
increased. Descriptive articles still represent major part of PLISJ but articles based on empirical research
have increased. Mostly, articles written in English language are published in the journal but number of
articles written in Urdu has improved.
PLISJ published fewer articles during 1998-2002 and its publication was not regular as two issues
were combined for whole of this period. However, situation changed during last five years and publication
of the journal is regular now with sharp increase in the number of articles published. There are variations
in details of information about authors as information was either missing, not provided or intentionally left
by authors.
Recommendations
Working and future Pakistani LIS professionals should be trained in research methodology and
use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) so that they can actively participate
in research activities.
Research facilities and environment, which is conducive for research, should be provided to
promote LIS research in Pakistan.
LIS researchers, especially faculty members, should also pay attention to the neglected areas of
research like Management, Publishing and legal issues, Information use and sociology of
information, and Housing technologies.
Team work should be encouraged by LIS faculty through assigning group projects so that habit of
collaboration is developed among future LIS professionals.
Publicity of PLISJ should be done actively to attract authors from other parts of the world.
Launching of the journal website may be helpful in this regard.
Despite the fact that contribution to LIS literature from female professionals has increased, they
need to be encouraged by providing them incentives to take part in research activities.
Emphasis on practical research should be increased in LIS schools so that future professionals
are trained for such research activities.
LIS professionals in Pakistan should consider their national language also for dissemination of
their knowledge and ideas while PLISJ should encourage writing of articles in Urdu by providing
more space for them.
PLISJ should provide detailed information about authors. It will certainly help readers to know
about the background of authors. It will also facilitate future analysis of literature published in the
journal.
References
Alemna, A. A. (1996). The periodical literature of library and information in Africa: 1990-1995.
International Information & Library Review 28 : 93-103.

“LIS Research in Pakistan: An Analysis of Pakistan Library and Information Science Journal 1998-2007,” Mirza Muhammad Naseer,
Dr. Khalid Mahmood. Library Philosophy and Practice 2009 (June)
9
Anwar, M. A. (1981). Research in library science at the University of the Punjab, Lahore. Lahore:
Department of Library Science, University of the Punjab.
Asghar, M. (1992). Problems of library and information science research in Pakistan. In Sajjad ur
Rehman, A. S. Chaudhry & A. H. Qarshi (Eds.), Library education in Pakistan: Past, present and future
(1st ed., pp. 151-161). Lahore: Punjab University Library Science Alumni Association.
Buttlar, L. (1999). Information sources in library and information science doctoral research. Library &
Information Science Research 21 (2): 227-245.
Haider, S. J. (1978). Status of library research in Pakistan. Libri 28 (4): 326-337.
Haider, S. J. (1988). Library literature in Pakistan. International Library Review 20 : 65-100.
Kajberg, L. (1996). A content analysis of library & information science serial literature published in
Denmark, 1957-1086. Library & Information Science Research 18 : 25-52.
Kaser, D. (1992). Asa Don Dickinson: A librarian of his times. In Sajjad ur Rehman, A. S. Chaudhry & A.
H. Qarshi (Eds.), Library education in Pakistan: Past, present and future (1st ed., pp. 3-10). Lahore:
Punjab University Library Science Alumni Association.
Khan, M., & Samdani, R. A. (1997). Library resources and publishing: 50 years analysis. Pakistan Library
Bulletin 28 (4): 29-39.
Mahmood, K. (1996). Library and information services in Pakistan: A review of articles published in
foreign journals. International Information & Library Review 28 : 383-405.
Ocholla, D. N., & Ocholla, L. (2007). Research in library and information science in South Africa: An
analysis of journal research output from 1993-2006. Paper presented at the World Library and Information
Congress: 73rd IFLA General Conference and Council, 19-23 August 2007.
Porto, S. D., & Marchitelli, A. (2006). The functionality and flexibility of traditional classification schemes
applied to a Content Management System (CMS): facets, DDC, JITA. Paper presented at the 2nd ISKO
Italy-UniMIB meeting, June 9, 2006.
Samdani, R. A. (1998). Professional library journals of Pakistan: 50 years historical analysis (1947-1997).
Pakistan Library Bulletin 29 (1-2): 22-34.
Tiew, W. S. (2006). Authorship characteristics in Sekitar Perpustakaan 1994-2003: A bibliometric study.
Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science 11 (1): 65-75.
Tiew, W. S., Abrizah, A., & Kiran, K. (2002). Malaysian Journal of Library and Information Science 1996-
2000: A bibliometric study. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science 6 (2): 43-56.
Usmani, M. A. (1995). Pakistan Library Bulletin: impact of its writings on librarianship in Pakistan.
Pakistan Library Bulletin 26 (3-4): 13-34.
Zemon, M., & Bahr, A. H. (1998). An analysis of articles by college librarians. College & Research
Libraries 59 : 421-431.

“LIS Research in Pakistan: An Analysis of Pakistan Library and Information Science Journal 1998-2007,” Mirza Muhammad Naseer,
Dr. Khalid Mahmood. Library Philosophy and Practice 2009 (June)
10
Standard five: Library and Information Resources. Available: http://www.nwccu.org/standards and
policies/standard5/NWCCU_Standard_Five.htm .
Tsafe, A. G. (2004). Students' utilization of Usmanu Danfodiyo University Medical Library, Sokoto.
Gateway Library Journal 7 (1): 10-20
Ugah, A. D. (2008). availability and accessibility of information sources and the use of library services at
Michael Okpara University of Agriculture. Library Philosophy and Practice. Available:
http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/~mbolin/ugah4.htm
Ugwu C. I. (2008). The effect of personal characteristics on the use of information sources by social
science researchers at the University of Nigeria, Nsukka. Library Philosophy and Practice. Available:
http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/~mbolin/ugwu.htm
Weber M. A., & Flatley, R. K. (2008) What do students want? A focus group study of students at a mid-
sized public university. Available: http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/~mbolin/weber-flatley2.htm
Whitmire, E. (2002). Academic library performance measures and undergraduates' library use and
educational outcomes. Library & Information Science Research 24: 107–128.