MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2996596465 · doi:10.18438/eblip29628

Bibliometric Analysis Provides a Detailed Map of Information Literacy Literature in the Social Sciences and Humanities

2019· article· en· W2996596465 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jessica Koos

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence Based Library and Information Practice · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology-Enhanced Education Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScopusLibrary scienceInformation literacyPublishingLiteracyBibliometricsIndex (typography)Social scienceSociologyComputer scienceWorld Wide WebPolitical scienceMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A Review of:
 Bhardwaj, R.K. (2017). Information literacy in the social sciences and humanities: A bibliometric study. Information and Learning Science, 188(1/2), 67–89. https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-09-2016-0068
 Abstract
 Objective – To determine the scope and distribution of information literacy research documents in the humanities and social sciences published from 2001 to 2012.
 Design – Bibliometric analysis.
 Setting – N/A
 Subjects – 1,990 document records retrieved from a Scopus database search. 
 Methods – Using the database Scopus, the author created and conducted a search for documents related to the concept of information literacy. Articles, review papers, conference articles, notes, short surveys, and letters were included in the results. Only documents published from January 1, 2001 to December 31, 2012 were included in the study. The author then performed various bibliometric analyses of the results.
 Main Results – The author found that the number of publications and citations have increased over time, although the average citations per publication (ACPP) decreased significantly during the time period being studied. The majority of the literature published on this topic is in English and produced within the United States. The Transformative Activity Index was calculated to determine changes in publishing patterns across countries from 2001 to 2012. The amount of research collaboration across countries was calculated as well, with the U.S. being the most collaborative. The top journals publishing on this topic were identified by calculating the h-index. An individual from Universidad de Granada in Spain published the greatest number of articles from a single author, and this university was found to have produced the greatest amount of research. Documents produced by the United Kingdom have the highest citation rates. A total of 1,385 documents were cited at least once, and each item on average was cited five times.
 Conclusion – Most of the articles on information literacy in the social sciences and humanities comes from developed countries. The results of this study may help to inform those interested in researching this field further.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesBibliometrics, Scholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.583
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0170.050
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.235
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.315 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvidence Based Library and Information PracticeSame topicTechnology-Enhanced Education StudiesFrench-language works237,207