IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v129y2024i1d10.1007_s11192-023-04878-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

ASEAN Library and Information Science (LIS) research (2018–2022): a bibliometric analysis with strategies for enhanced global impact

Author

Listed:
  • Mad Khir Johari Abdullah Sani

    (Universiti Teknologi MARA Selangor Branch)

  • Sharunizam Shari

    (Universiti Teknologi MARA Kedah Branch)

  • Noor Zaidi Sahid

    (Universiti Teknologi MARA Selangor Branch)

  • Norshila Shaifuddin

    (Universiti Teknologi MARA Selangor Branch)

  • Zuraidah Abdul Manaf

    (Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman)

  • Alexander Servellen

    (Elsevier Singapore Pte Ltd.)

Abstract

This study provides an in-depth bibliometric assessment of the Library and Information Science (LIS) sector within the ASEAN region from 2018 to 2022, leveraging data from the Scopus core collection. The overarching goal was to uncover current research patterns, collaborations, and productivity, subsequently crafting a strategic blueprint to enhance ASEAN LIS research’s global prominence. Methodologically, the research employed Scopus All Science Journal Classification Codes (ASJC) for LIS to retrieve a comprehensive set of relevant publications. Out of an initial count of 65,822 documents, refined search parameters narrowed this to 2768 outputs, or 4.2% of total LIS documents, for the specified timeframe and region. Key observations from the data depict a significant shift in 2020, likely influenced by the COVID-19 pandemic, underscoring the importance of timely, relevant research. Countries such as Malaysia and Singapore emerged as leading contributors, emphasizing quality research, while Indonesia’s substantial output did not necessarily guarantee citation impact. The study accentuates the increasing importance of interdisciplinary collaborations, as evident from platforms like the International Journal of Information Management. For ASEAN’s sustained growth in the global LIS arena, the emphasis should be on leveraging individual nation strengths, reinforcing international ties, and prioritizing globally relevant research themes.

Suggested Citation

  • Mad Khir Johari Abdullah Sani & Sharunizam Shari & Noor Zaidi Sahid & Norshila Shaifuddin & Zuraidah Abdul Manaf & Alexander Servellen, 2024. "ASEAN Library and Information Science (LIS) research (2018–2022): a bibliometric analysis with strategies for enhanced global impact," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(1), pages 95-125, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:129:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-023-04878-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-023-04878-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-023-04878-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-023-04878-0?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Raminta Pranckutė, 2021. "Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-59, March.
    2. Huang, Yu Wen & Kittner, Noah & Kammen, Daniel M., 2019. "ASEAN grid flexibility: Preparedness for grid integration of renewable energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 711-726.
    3. A. Velez-Estevez & P. García-Sánchez & J. A. Moral-Munoz & M. J. Cobo, 2022. "Why do papers from international collaborations get more citations? A bibliometric analysis of Library and Information Science papers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(12), pages 7517-7555, December.
    4. Anne-Wil Harzing & Satu Alakangas, 2017. "Microsoft Academic: is the phoenix getting wings?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(1), pages 371-383, January.
    5. Anne-Wil Harzing & Satu Alakangas, 2017. "Microsoft Academic is one year old: the Phoenix is ready to leave the nest," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(3), pages 1887-1894, September.
    6. Tuan V. Nguyen & Ly T. Pham, 2011. "Scientific output and its relationship to knowledge economy: an analysis of ASEAN countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(1), pages 107-117, October.
    7. Badri Munir Sukoco & Rizky Ananda Putra & Humam Nur Muqaffi & Muhammad Vinka Lutfian & Hendro Wicaksono, 2023. "Comparative Study of ASEAN Research Productivity," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(1), pages 21582440221, January.
    8. Jane G. Payumo & Taurean C. Sutton, 2015. "A bibliometric assessment of ASEAN collaboration in plant biotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(3), pages 1043-1059, June.
    9. Lutz Bornmann & Alexander Tekles & Loet Leydesdorff, 2019. "How well does I3 perform for impact measurement compared to other bibliometric indicators? The convergent validity of several (field-normalized) indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(2), pages 1187-1205, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zhentao Liang & Jin Mao & Kun Lu & Gang Li, 2021. "Finding citations for PubMed: a large-scale comparison between five freely available bibliographic data sources," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(12), pages 9519-9542, December.
    2. Thelwall, Mike, 2018. "Microsoft Academic automatic document searches: Accuracy for journal articles and suitability for citation analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 1-9.
    3. He Huang & Shary Heuninckx & Cathy Macharis, 2024. "20 years review of the multi actor multi criteria analysis (MAMCA) framework: a proposition of a systematic guideline," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 343(1), pages 313-348, December.
    4. Sven E. Hug & Martin P. Brändle, 2017. "The coverage of Microsoft Academic: analyzing the publication output of a university," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(3), pages 1551-1571, December.
    5. V. A. Traag & L. Waltman, 2019. "Systematic analysis of agreement between metrics and peer review in the UK REF," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-12, December.
    6. Kousha, Kayvan & Thelwall, Mike, 2018. "Can Microsoft Academic help to assess the citation impact of academic books?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 972-984.
    7. Xiancheng Li & Wenge Rong & Haoran Shi & Jie Tang & Zhang Xiong, 2018. "The impact of conference ranking systems in computer science: a comparative regression analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(2), pages 879-907, August.
    8. Sumiko Asai, 2020. "The effect of collaboration with large publishers on the internationality and influence of open access journals for research institutions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 663-677, July.
    9. Sumiko Asai, 2021. "Collaboration between research institutes and large and small publishers for publishing open access journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(6), pages 5245-5262, June.
    10. Mike Thelwall & Nabeil Maflahi, 2020. "Academic collaboration rates and citation associations vary substantially between countries and fields," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 71(8), pages 968-978, August.
    11. Yihui Lan & Kenneth W Clements & Zong Ken Chai, 2022. "Australian PhDs in Economics and Finance: Professional Activities, Productivity and Prospects," Economics Discussion / Working Papers 22-04, The University of Western Australia, Department of Economics.
    12. Dunaiski, Marcel & Geldenhuys, Jaco & Visser, Willem, 2019. "On the interplay between normalisation, bias, and performance of paper impact metrics," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 270-290.
    13. repec:hal:cepnwp:hal-01922266 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Michael Färber & Lazaros Tampakis, 2024. "Analyzing the impact of companies on AI research based on publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(1), pages 31-63, January.
    15. Abdelghani Maddi & Aouatif De La Laurencie, 2018. "La dynamique des SHS françaises dans le Web of Science," CEPN Working Papers 2018-05, Centre d'Economie de l'Université de Paris Nord.
    16. Anne-Wil Harzing, 2019. "Two new kids on the block: How do Crossref and Dimensions compare with Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus and the Web of Science?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(1), pages 341-349, July.
    17. Kousha, Kayvan & Thelwall, Mike & Abdoli, Mahshid, 2018. "Can Microsoft Academic assess the early citation impact of in-press articles? A multi-discipline exploratory analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 287-298.
    18. Mike Thelwall, 2018. "Does Microsoft Academic find early citations?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(1), pages 325-334, January.
    19. Michael Thelwall, 2018. "Can Microsoft Academic be used for citation analysis of preprint archives? The case of the Social Science Research Network," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(2), pages 913-928, May.
    20. Arash Najmaei & Zahra Sadeghinejad, 2023. "Green and sustainable business models: historical roots, growth trajectory, conceptual architecture and an agenda for future research—A bibliometric review of green and sustainable business models," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(2), pages 957-999, February.
    21. Robin Haunschild & Sven E. Hug & Martin P. Brändle & Lutz Bornmann, 2018. "The number of linked references of publications in Microsoft Academic in comparison with the Web of Science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(1), pages 367-370, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:129:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-023-04878-0. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.