Blessinger.indd Analysis of a Decade in Library Literature: 1994–2004 Kelly Blessinger and Michele Frasier The purpose of this study was to analyze trends in publication and citation in library and information science journals over a decade (1994–2004) of the literature.This examination revealed the areas of concentration within the research, frequently published subjects through the years, and the characteristics of the top-cited authors and resources during this time. This information allows those in the field to follow the trends in publica- tion, gives researchers the tools to determine which journals might give their work the most exposure and recognition, and can help libraries to make collection management decisions in this subject area. itation and content analysis within a field of literature can give insight into the devel- opment of a profession. An evaluation of the content of the literature can determine subject trends, thus reveal- ing the major issues confronting the pro- fession at a given period of time. Citation analysis data may be utilized for a number of purposes: as a tool to assist librarians making collection and weeding decisions; as a mechanism for discovering bibliomet- ric trends; and as a way for publishers to track the competition. Moreover, citation and content studies have been adapted to a variety of research questions. Cita- tion studies used to examine publication trends in specific academic disciplines can illustrate a number of interesting currents. Haiqi’s examination of three prominent biology journals reveals that multiau- thored articles are a growing trend in the field. In one journal studied, the average number of authors per article was 7.71. In addition, the author found that the “hot papers” (those articles receiving the greatest number of citations) in the field of biology had more funding sources as well as the participation of more institutions.1 In a bibliometric analysis of anthropology literature, Hider examined, among other things, the age of cited publications in an- thropology journals as well as the form of cited material. He concluded that the age of cited references is dropping, for anthro- pologists no longer feel the obligation to cite the established literature. In addition, Hider contends that, in the United King- dom, “books remain the most important literary form in anthropology.”2 Content analysis of library and informa- tion science (LIS) research is the central topic of several studies. A 1988 article by Atkins reviewed a decade of the literature from 1975 through 1985. His quantitative analysis of subject trends in LIS publishing illustrated “a heavy concentration on such automation-related subjects as information retrieval, databases, cataloging, library automation, technology, and research Kelly Blessinger is Associate Reference Librarian in the Middleton Library at Louisiana State University; e-mail: kblessi@lsu.edu. Michele Frasier is Circulation, Instruction, and Reserves Librarian in the Linscheid Library at East Central University; e-mail: smccullr@mailclerk.ecok.edu. 155 mailto:smccullr@mailclerk.ecok.edu mailto:kblessi@lsu.edu 156 College & Research Libraries March 2007 methods.”3 Likewise, Buttlar’s analysis of sixteen library journals reveals that au- tomation was still a frequently discussed topic in library literature in the late 1980s.4 Other studies focused on subject coverage as well as the methodology behind the articles published. Examining over 800 articles from 1985, Järvelin and Vakkari divided the literature into two groups: research articles and professional articles (e.g., reviews, discussions, bibliographies). They found that, despite this division, the most frequent subjects in both groups were those discussing practical topics that in- volved the daily operations of libraries.5 Other articles have researched the authorship of the literature, or studied certain populations such as U.S. LIS fac- ulty,6 LIS professionals in Africa,7 or U.K. LIS chair holders8 to determine publication productivity within these groups. Several studies found that academic librarians are major contributors to the body of literature. Yerkey’s examination of 855 documents affirms that academic librarians published the greatest percentage of documents, fol- lowed by library school faculty and medi- cal librarians.9 Another study on this topic found that academic librarians produced 43.6 percent (1,579) of 3,624 articles exam- ined.10 The articles previously mentioned also note that, since academic librarians far outnumber library school faculty, library school faculty are the most productive when analyzed on a percentage basis. For this study, the authors chose to investigate several aspects within a recent decade (1994–2004) of LIS literature. First, the authors wished to examine what topics were being discussed within the scholarly communications to see what pa erns emerged over the years. Second, the authors wanted to study citation pat- terns to determine the characteristics of the top-cited researchers and materials. Research into the highly cited authors would reveal the demographic of this group as a whole, and the analysis of the top-cited journals would illustrate wheth- er authors were primarily using journals within the field for their research. Methodology Thomson’s Journal Citation Reports (JCR) Social Science Edition was consulted to ascertain the journals of high repute within library and information science. This re- source was chosen due to the high-quality standards for journals indexed in Thom- son’s journal citation products.11 Fi y-five journals appeared in the category of Li- brary and Information Science in the JCR in 2003. Ulrich’s Periodicals Directory was then consulted to ensure that the journals had the designation of Library and Informa- tion Sciences as a subject descriptor. This was done to eliminate the journals that focused mainly on information science. Ulrich’s was also used to determine that the journals were indexed in both the Library Literature and the Social Sciences Citation In- dex (SSCI) databases for the ten-year study period. The twenty-eight journals that met these criteria are listed in table 1, which is sorted by impact factor. Impact factor can be defined as “a measure of the frequency with which the ‘average article’ in a jour- nal has been cited in a particular year or period. The annual JCR impact factor is a ratio between citations and recent citable items published.”12 The impact factor of the 28 journals listed in the table averaged .542. From the list of twenty-eight journals, ten journals were randomly selected by the computer for inclusion in this study, and these journals are highlighted in table 1. A random sample of ten influential journals was thought to be representative of the trends of the literature as a whole during this time period, while also helping to keep the study at a manageable size. The ten journals studied reflect an average impact factor of .604, slightly above the mean. Each journal studied was searched both in Library Literature and SSCI for the ten- year period of this study. Searches were limited strictly to journal articles in the databases to eliminate items such as book reviews, editorials, bibliographies, and le ers to the editor. Each article’s subjects and citations were edited for consistency and then imported into Microso Access for further analysis. If the information did http:products.11 Analysis of a Decade in Library Literature 157 not include all of the required fields such as author, cited year, and source, the cita- tions were deleted. The group of deleted citations represented a small percentage of the total citations. While SSCI was used to do the citation analysis, the subject analy- sis was determined using the subjects listed in the indexing for Library Literature, as the subjects within the Library Literature database are much more detailed and consistent than those in SSCI. Results A total of 2,220 articles were published in TABLE 1 Library and Information Science Journals that Met Criteria (Those used in study are highlighted) Title Impact Factor 2003 Journal of Documentation 1.603 Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 1.473 College & Research Libraries 1.343 Information Processing & Management 1.179 Journal of Information Science 1.067 Library Resources & Technical Services 0.923 Library and Information Science 0.833 Library & Information Science Research 0.735 Journal of Academic Librarianship 0.647 Restaurator International Journal for the Preservation of Library and Archival Material 0.559 Library Quarterly 0.485 ASLIB Proceedings 0.459 Library Trends 0.440 Online Information Review 0.417 Journal of the Medical Library Association 0.408 Law Library Journal 0.326 Libri 0.312 Reference & User Services Quarterly 0.312 Journal of Librarianship & Information Science 0.294 Interlending & Document Supply 0.273 Library Collections Acquisitions & Technical Services 0.231 Library Journal 0.208 Information Technology and Libraries 0.200 Knowledge Organization 0.200 Journal of Government Information 0.086 Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science 0.071 Zeitschrift fur Bibliothekswesen und Bibliographie 0.069 NFD Information-Wissenschaft und Praxis 0.013 158 College & Research Libraries March 2007 the ten journals during the period of this study. The journals varied considerably in how many articles they published over this ten-year period. Library Trends published the most articles (434), while Library & Information Science published the least (56). Of the articles studied, 41 percent were wri en with the help of a second author, and 13 percent were wri en by three or more authors. This high collaboration rate has been noted in past studies on the literature within the profession as well.13,14 A 2000 article by Hart gives several reasons for this, such as increased quality with multiple authorship and higher acceptance in peer-reviewed journals.15 Subjects The articles queried had an average of three subjects assigned to each article. Due to such a large number of subjects covered, the subjects were divided into 43 general subject categories. Once specific institutional names and personal names were excluded, the subjects were grouped into five major categories. The categories (ranked by percentage of subjects that fell within that topic) were: 1. Library Operations (33%) 2. Research in Library and Information Science/Users (20%) 3. L i b r a r y / I n f o r m a t i o n 1S c i e n c e Profession (18%) 4. Technology (18%) 5. Publishing/Publishing Studies (11%) See Appendix A for the list of which subjects fell under various categories. The reader can tell from the results that practi- cal items are still what is highly discussed within the literature. As our profession changes with new technologies, the lit- erature naturally reflects this. Most of the subjects within the categories experienced periods of low and high discussion within the literature. The subjects most covered within Library Operations included cataloging, reference/information services, and user instruction and education. Cataloging peaked in 1997 with articles regarding automation. Traditional subjects includ- ing classification systems and authority control were also discussed frequently during the study period. Other popular subjects within cataloging that reflected the increase of technology that domi- nated this decade include metadata and the cataloging of Internet Web sites. The subject of reference/information services rose from 1999 to its peak in 2001, with ar- ticles primarily on automation and virtual libraries. Since many libraries were look- ing into or had implemented virtual chat services during this time, this could eas- ily explain the popularity of this subject. The evaluation of reference/information services was a traditional topic that was popular during this time period as well. User instruction/education rose sharply in prevalence in the literature from 2000 to 2001, with a large number of articles on bibliographic instruction geared toward college and university students. The big push toward information literacy during this time is most likely accountable for this trend. Other topics that were popular within this subject include computer-as- sisted instruction and distance education. Due to the plethora of resources that became available electronically during the time of this study, computer-assisted instruction became the norm as more students were able to access materials electronically and to take classes and obtain degrees from a distance. In the category of Research in Library and Information Science/Users, the popu- lar topics were user studies, information retrieval, and theoretical issues. User studies were popular as a research method for many of the articles. The studies were primarily conducted by surveys and use statistics. This is consistent with findings of an earlier study, which stated that the methods of research in library and infor- mation science are “heavily concentrated in the survey, historical, and observation and description methods.”16 Some of the more popular topics for studies included information needs, the Internet, online catalogs, and serial publications. Articles http:journals.15 19 94 19 95 19 96 19 97 19 98 19 99 20 00 20 01 20 02 20 03 20 04 Analysis of a Decade in Library Literature 159 on information retrieval reached a peak in 1999. All of the new electronic indexes and databases no doubt revived interest in how users retrieved information through this new media. While there were many articles regarding the evaluation of infor- mation retrieval, there was also a large portion that focused on the social aspects of the topic. Of the theoretical topics covered, the most popular were cogni- tion, information theory, philosophical aspects of information science, knowl- edge management, and ethics. Academic and research libraries were the types of institutions most discussed across all subjects, particularly within the category of Library/Information Science Profession, followed by public libraries. Some popular topics discussed within librarianship and professional issues included relations with faculty and curriculum, the status of librarians in general—particularly academic librarians—philosophical as- pects of the profession, as well as various careers within the field. The subjects that fell into the Technology category mainly covered the Internet, information science, indexes and databases, and automation. The Internet, as we all know, has changed most aspects of our profession, so it is no surprise that it was heavily discussed dur- ing this decade. In 1994 there were very few articles on this subject, but research increased with a peak in 2001. The most popular topics within this subject were the design and evaluation of Web sites, likely due to libraries making their Web presence known during this decade. Other topics included Web portals and the Internet in general. Information science peaked as a subject in 1997, when the design of information systems was a frequently published subject. Other frequently pub- lished subjects within information science included optical data processing and open source so ware. Popular topics within indexes/databases included databases in the humanities, databases with pictures and full-text databases. Automation was the one subject within technology that demonstrated a sharp decline during the period of this study. The subject was a popular topic until it peaked in 1997 and has been decreasing in popularity since then. In the category of Publishing/Pub- lishing Studies, articles on serials and bibliometrics were the most common. In serials, the most popular topic was the evaluation of serials, specifically scientific and library and information science jour- FIGURE 1 Library Operations 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Cataloging Years Reference/Information Services User Instruction/Education Su bj ec t A pp ea ra nc e 160 College & Research Libraries March 2007 FIGURE 2 Research in Librarianship/Users 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Years S u b je ct A p p ea ra n ce User Studies Information Retrieval Library/Information Issues (theoretical) nals. Escalating serial costs, particularly in the sciences, forced libraries to evaluate their collections during this decade. For a graphical display of the top subjects in the categories, refer to figures 1–5. The top twenty-five overall subjects wri en about from 1994–2004 are listed in table 2. Citations Of the 47,389 citations listed by the journals studied, 19,482 (41%) were from sources cited only once. Materials cited in articles during the period studied ranged in pub- lication date from 1605 through 2004. The majority of articles cited fell in the more recent date range, with 62 percent of the articles cited published from 1990 to 2004. Journals with over 100 citations a ributed to them are listed in table 3. Most of the journals fell squarely into the subject area of Library and Information Science, but the few that did not (in order of times cited) were Communications of the ACM (Associa- tion for Computing Machinery) which is primarily an information science publica- tion, and Science, a well-known and highly FIGURE 3 Library/Information Science Profession 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Year s S u b je c t A p p e a ra n c e Librarianship/Professional Issues Associations/Committees Academic/Research Libraries Public Libraries 2004 Analysis of a Decade in Library Literature 161 FIGURE 4 Technology 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 1994 S u b je c t A p p e a ra n c e Internet 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Years Information Science Indexes and Databases Automation regarded general science journal. This table provides information on all of the journals that were heavily cited by the ten journals studied, not just those indexed by SSCI, as the JCR product provides. The result is a more complete list of what journals were heavily cited during this decade. Authors There were a total of 21,994 unique authors cited in this study, with 69 percent of these authors cited only once. The top-cited au- thors are listed in Table 4. The list contains the authors who had more than fi y cita- tions a ributed to their work in the jour- nals queried in this study. The authors are listed in descending order of total citations to materials wri en by them. The reader should note that the number listed under the “times cited in study” column is the number of citations that were culled from the specific journals studied for this article, not all journals over this time period. When there was a tie between the authors who FIGURE 5 Publishing/Publishing Studies 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Years S u b je c t A p p e a ra n c e Serials Bibliometrics 162 College & Research Libraries March 2007 had the same number of citations to their work in this study, this was indicated by a (T). The “works cited” column indicates how many dif- ferent works were cited for each author during the period of this study. As the reader can tell, the highly cited authors are also very prolific. The average number of different works cited by authors on this list was forty. Although Birger Hjorland received the most citations to his work in this study (165), Ste- phen Wiberley, who tied for 28th place with 50 cita- tions to his work, had the highest average number of citations per work (4.2). The SSCI record contains the author ’s address as one of its fields, so this source was consulted to find the affiliation of the authors for their most cited work. The institu- tions’ Web pages were then checked to see if they were currently affiliated with that institution in 2005. The top researchers are overwhelmingly af- filiated with academic in- stitutions, specifically with LIS programs. It was found that most of the top-cited authors were full professors or of high aca- demic rank at their institutions, indicating that they had worked in that capacity for some time. Only a few authors fell out of this category. Several institutions had more than one highly cited researcher, including the Royal School of Library and Informa- tion Science in Denmark, Rutgers Univer- sity, UCLA, and Indiana University. All of these programs except the Royal School of Library and Information Science are ALA TABLE 2 Top Subjects from 1994 through 2004 Rank Subject Times Covered 1 Cataloging 548 2 User Studies 449 3 Internet 308 4 Serials 283 5 Librarianship/Professional Issues 279 6 Reference/Information Services 227 7 Information Retrieval 196 8 Information Science 189 9 Associations/Committees 156 10 User Instruction/Education 136 11 Indexes/Databases 135 12 Automation 134 13 Library/Information Issues (theoretical) 127 14 Academic/Research Libraries 121 15 Bibliometrics 106 16 Library/Information Issues (practical) 104 17 Administration 97 18 Collection Development 93 19 Information Needs 88 20 Public Libraries 85 21 Publishing/Publishers 82 22 Library/Information networks 77 23 Research Methodology 72 24 Literature Evaluation 71 25 Indexing/Abstracting 62 accredited and offer Ph.D. programs in Library and Information Science. A ma- jority (75%) of the authors are currently working in the United States, with only eight highly cited LIS researchers currently working in other locales. The other areas represented include Denmark, the United Kingdom, and India. This is consistent with findings from other studies, such as a 1993 article on international librarian- ship that “revealed a dominance by the more industrialized countries, which published the majority of documents.”17 Analysis of a Decade in Library Literature 163 TABLE 3 Top Quartile of Journals Cited, 1994–2004 (Those listed in Table 1 are highlighted) Rank Source Times Cited 1 Journal of the American Society for Information Science 1516 2 College & Research Libraries 1440 3 Journal of Documentation 828 4 Journal of Academic Librarianship 654 5 Library Journal 558 6 Library & Information Science Research 498 7 Library Trends 454 8 Library Quarterly 419 9 Reference & User Services Quarterly 407 10 Information Processing & Management 369 11 Library Resources & Technical Services 298 12 Journal of Information Science 296 13 Scientometrics 244 14 American Libraries 218 15 Information Technology & Libraries 216 16 Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 210 17 Bulletin of the Medical Library Association 201 18 Journal of Library Administration 190 19 Annual Review of Information Science & Technology 176 20 Collection Management 173 21 Reference Librarian 167 22 Communications of the ACM 163 23 Research Strategies 158 24 Serials Librarian 134 25 ONLINE 133 26 Reference Services Review 131 27 ASLIB Proceedings 131 28 Library Administration & Management 124 29 Library Acquisitions-Practice and Theory 122 30 Computers in Libraries 117 31 College & Research Libraries News 114 32 Knowledge Organization 114 33 Information Technology 108 34 Science 106 35 Serials Review 102 36 Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 100 164 College & Research Libraries March 2007 TABLE 4 Most Cited Personal Authors, 1994–2004 (in rank order) Rank Author Most Recent Affiliation/Department Times Cited in Study Works Cited 1 Birger Hjorland Royal School of Library and Information Science, Denmark/ Department of Information Studies 165 56 2 Brenda Dervin Ohio State University/School of Communication 135 52 3 Carol Kuhlthau Rutgers University/School of Communication, Information and Library Studies 131 38 4 Blaise Cronin Indiana University/School of Library and Information Science 127 65 5 Peter Hernon Simmons College/Graduate School of Library and Information Science 117 62 6 Marcia Bates UCLA/ Graduate School of Education and Information Studies 105 40 7 Peter Ingwersen Royal School of Library and Information Science, Denmark/ Department of Information Studies 101 43 8(T) F.W. Lancaster University of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign/ Graduate School of Library and Information Science 100 58 8(T) Gerard Salton Cornell/Computer Science (deceased 1995) 100 52 9 Tefko Saracevic Rutgers University/School of Communication, Information and Library Studies 99 44 10(T) Eugene Garfield President and Editor-in-Chief of The Scientist/Founder and Chairman Emeritus of the Institute of Scientific Information 98 70 10(T) Tom Wilson University of Sheffield/The Department of Information Studies 98 27 11 David Ellis University of Wales/Information Studies 96 31 12(T) Nicholas Belkin Rutgers University/School of Communication, Information and Library Studies 92 39 12(T) Christine Borgman UCLA/ Graduate School of Education and Information Studies 92 42 13 Charles McClure Indiana University/School of Library and Information Science 91 52 14 Amanda Spink University of Pittsburgh/School of Information Sciences 81 44 Analysis of a Decade in Library Literature 165 TABLE 4 Most Cited Personal Authors, 1994–2004 (in rank order) Rank 15 Author Raya Fidel Most Recent Affiliation/Department University of Washington/Information School Times Cited in Study 79 Works Cited 25 16 Maurice Line British Library, library consultant, editor Alexandria The Journal of National and International Library and Information Issues (retired) 76 40 17 Carol Tenopir University of Tennessee/School of Information Sciences 73 53 18 S.R. Ranganathan Documentation Research and Training Center, Bangalore, India, founder, professor, and director (deceased 1972) 72 54 19 Patrick Wilson University of California, Berkeley/ School of Library and Information Studies (deceased 2003) 71 32 20 Gary Marchionini University of North Carolina/School of Information and Library Science 70 34 21 Elfreda Chatman Florida State University/School of Information Studies (deceased 2002) 66 16 22 Michael Gorman California State University, Fresno/ Dean of Library Services at the Henry Madden Library 61 42 23 Stephen Harter Indiana University/School of Library & Information Science (retired) 60 28 24 Michael Buckland University of California, Berkeley/ Co- Director of the Electronic Cultural Atlas Initiative and Emeritus Professor in the School of Information Management and Systems 59 31 25 Mike Thelwall University of Wolverhampton/ School of Computing and Information Technology 56 30 26 John Budd University of Missouri/School of Information Science & Learning Technologies 55 35 27 Walt Crawford Senior Analyst, RLG 53 29 28(T) Bertram Brookes University College, London/School of Library, Archive, and Information Studies, visiting professor other universities (deceased 1991) 50 33 28(T) Stephen Wiberley Jr. University of Illinois Chicago/ University Library 50 12 166 College & Research Libraries March 2007 Most of the authors listed are still actively working within the profession, with the exception of two who have retired and five who are deceased. Although LIS is still a female-dominated profession, most of the top-cited researchers were male, with a 75 percent representation of the whole. While studies indicate that men were much more prevalent in the literature in the past, the same studies now show that the gap is closing in regard to gender and publica- tion. A 1999 study on the history of the journal JASIS shows that participation in female authorship increased over the years from 33 percent in 1955 to 43 percent in 1995.18 Likewise, a 1996 article that studied College & Research Libraries articles found that, for the first time since its publication, the number of articles primarily authored by women equaled that of men from 1989 through 1994, and the total number of women authors was more than that of men.19 A shi in citations may soon reflect this trend as well. Conclusion The analysis of LIS literature over a decade illustrated that librarians are still largely writing about the practical issues that face the profession. As the issues change, our literature reflects these currents. Naturally, new technologies in information science, most notably the Internet, had a tremen- dous impact on almost every aspect of our profession during this decade. An analysis of authorship shows the highly collabora- tive nature of the profession, and citation research indicates that primarily journals within the field are used for research. Knowing which journals are highly cited is helpful to authors submi ing scholarly work by helping them to determine where their research might have the largest use and influence. Additionally, the list will help them to determine which journals may be held in the highest regard for performance appraisals, promotion, and tenure decisions. When used in conjunc- tion with other information such as local use data, this could also assist libraries in making collection management and help publishers track their competition within the field. The list of highly cited authors revealed whose research within the field was well known and respected during this decade, although the demographics are different from the profession as a whole. While prior studies indicate that academic librarians and LIS educators publish at nearly the same rate, it is clear from the data gathered during this study that LIS educators dominate the list of authors who are highly cited. Reasons for this differen- tial citation rate would be an interesting basis for further study. The snapshot in time of the top-cited researchers will al- low those who wish to do studies in the future on the field’s highly cited authors to compare trends over time in demograph- ics such as gender, institutional affiliation, and job position. It could also serve to help those considering a Ph.D. in the field to determine which universities have professors who are highly cited within the literature. Periodic evaluation of the literature is important because it grants insight into the evolution of the profes- sion by revealing the issues, resources, and researchers that are of importance to our field. Notes 1. Zhang Haiqi, “More Authors, More Institutions and More Funding Sources: Hot Papers in Biology from 1991 to 1993,” Journal of the American Society for Information Science 48 (July 1997): 662–66. 2. Philip M. Hider, “Three Bibliometric Analyses of Anthropology Literature,” Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian 15, no. 1 (1996): 1–17. 3. Stephen E. Atkins, “Subject Trends in Library and Information Science Research, 1975– 1984.” Library Trends 36 (Spring 1988): 633–58. 4. Lois Bu lar, “Analyzing the Library Periodical Literature: Content and Authorship,” College & Research Libraries 52 (Jan. 1991): 39–53. http:decade.An Analysis of a Decade in Library Literature 167 5. Kalervo Järvelin and Per i Vakkari, “Content Analysis of Research Articles in Library and Information Science,” Library & Information Science Research 12 (Oct.–Dec. 1990): 395–421. 6. John Budd, “Scholarly Productivity of U.S. LIS Faculty: An Update,” Library Quarterly 70, no. 2 (2000): 230–45. 7. L. O. Aina and Patricia Neo Mooko, “Research and Publication Pa erns in Library and Information Science,” Information Development 15, no. 2 (1992): 114–19. 8. Blaise Cronin and Elisabeth Davenport, “Profiling the Professors,” Journal of Information Science 15, no. 1 (1989): 13–20. 9. A. Neil Yerkey, “Publishing in Library and Information Science: Audience, Subjects, Af- filiation, Source, and Format,” Library & Information Science Research 15 (Spring 1993): 165–84. 10. Ann C. Weller, Julie M. Hurd, and Stephen Wiberley, “Publication Pa erns of U.S. Academic Librarians from 1993 to 1997,” College & Research Libraries 60, no. 4 (1999): 352–62. 11. Thomson Scientific, “The Thomson Scientific Journal Selection Process.” Available online from h p://scientific.thomson.com/free/essays/selectionofmaterial/journalselection. [Accessed 5 December 2005]. 12. Thomson Scientific, ‘The ISI Impact Factor.” Available online from h p://scientific.thomson. com/free/essays/journalcitationreports/impactfactor. [Accessed 18 January 2006]. 13. James L. Terry, “Authorship in College & Research Libraries Revisited: Gender, Institutional Affiliation, Collaboration,” College & Research Libraries 57 (July 1996): 377–83. 14. Ben-Ami Lipetz, “Aspects of JASIS Authorship through Five Decades,” Journal of the American Society for Information Science 50, no. 11 (1999): 994–1003. 15. Richard L. Hart, “Co-authorship in the Academic Library Literature: A Survey of A itudes and Behaviors,” Journal of Academic Librarianship 26, no. 5 (2000): 339–45. 16. Patricia E. Feehan, W. Lee Gragg II, W. Michael Havener, and Diane D. Kester, “Library and Information Science Research: An Analysis of the 1984 Journal Literature,” Library & Information Science Research 9 (July 1987): 173–85. 17. Nonie Janet Bliss, “International Librarianship: A Bibliometric Analysis of the Field,” International Information & Library Review 25 (June 1993): 93–107. 18. Lipetz, “Aspects of JASIS Authorship,” 994–1003. 19. Terry, “Authorship in College & Research Libraries Revisited,” 377–83. Call for a complete catalog Elegant Solutions for Preservation ARCHIVAL PRODUCTS Pamphlet Binders Bound Four Flap Enclosures Music Binders Archival Binders P.O. Box 1413 Des Moines, Iowa 50305-1413 Archival Folders Archival Boards 800.526.5640 Fax 888.220.2397 Manuscript Folders Adhesives custserv@archival.com www.archival.com Hinge Board Covers Bookkeeper Academy Folders Century Boxes Newspaper/Map Folders Record Album Enclosures Polypropylene Sheet & Conservation Cloths Photo Protectors Conservation & Preservation Tapes archival.com http:archival.com http:www.archival.com mailto:custserv@archival.com 168 College & Research Libraries March 2007 APPENDIX A Category Library Operations Research in Librarianship/ Users Library/Information Science Profession Subject Number 1,624 Cataloging 548 Reference/Information Services 227 User Instruction/Education 136 Library/Information Issues (practical) 104 Administration 97 Collection Development 93 Indexing/Abstracting 62 Acquisitions 60 Interlibrary Loan 56 Public Relations 49 Communications 41 Library Finance 35 Circulation 35 Library Staff 32 Disability Services 29 Library Environment 20 997 User Studies 449 Information Retrieval 196 Library/Information Issues (theoretical) 127 Information Needs 88 Research Methodology 72 Research in Librarianship 41 Library/Information Science Research 24 888 Librarianship/Professional Issues 279 Associations/Committees 156 Academic/Research Libraries 121 Public Libraries 85 Library/Information networks 77 LIS Education 52 Special Collections/Libraries 42 Archives/Preservation 40 Children’s Libraries/Materials 36 Analysis of a Decade in Library Literature 169 Technology 871 Internet 308 Information Science 189 Indexes/Databases 135 Automation 134 Software 53 Electronic Publishing 52 Publishing/Publishing 560 Studies Serials 283 Bibliometrics 106 Publishing/Publishers 82 Literature Evaluation 71 Monographic Publications 18 Fifteenth Edition The Essential Language Reference ACRL March 29-31, 2007 in Baltimore “one of the most comprehensive catalogs of languages” “a veritable guide to the world’s . . .languages and cultures” “The efforts of numerous researchers result in a large, densely packed work with concise facts and figures.” New York Times, July 2005 ACRL, C&RL News Online, March 2005 Booklist, November 2006 edited by Raymond G. Gordon, Jr., 2005, 1272 pp., ISBN 978-1-55671-159-6, $80.00 Visit Booth 10 at ACRL 2007 in Baltimore to see this exciting reference for yourself. Enter to WIN a $25 Barnes&Noble gift card 2 winners each day - Thursday and Friday All entries through Saturday go into the - Grand Price drawing for $100 B&N card! SIL International BOOTH 10