«Doctoral dissertations of Library and Information Science in China: A co-word analysis Qian-Jin Zong • Hong-Zhou Shen • Qin-Jian Yuan • ...»
The hierarchical cluster analysis for top keywords with high frequency suggests that the research ﬁelds of LIS doctoral dissertations in China are varied. The evolution trends in strategic diagram reveal that many research ﬁelds in LIS doctoral dissertations in China are still immature; accordingly, the well-developed and core research ﬁelds are fewer, such as information resource, electronic government, ontology, digital library and knowledge management. In summary, it is notable that research ﬁelds of LIS doctoral dissertations in China are varied and many of them are still immature. This may be caused by two reasons.
Firstly, the development of LIS disciplines (especially the discipline of Information Science) is still immature. Taking Information Science for example, there is no undergraduate education in Information Science in China. That is, there is only doctoral/master’s education in Information Science in China. The researchers (e.g., Ph.D. candidate) are from different disciplines, such as mathematics, computer science, information systems, management science, economics, engineering, law, and so on. Thus, the research ﬁelds are varied due to the different backgrounds of disciplines. Secondly, the development of information technology and the growth of economics in China have motivated LIS schools to adjust their objectives, curriculum and knowledge structure in order to meet the various kinds of social needs (Dong 1997). Accordingly, the research ﬁelds of LIS doctoral dissertations become more speciﬁc and specialized. It should be noted that the doctoral education of LIS in China is only in a preliminary stage, thus, many research ﬁelds are still immature and need to be further studied.
As an exploratory study, this study also has some limitations. A little number of dissertations may contain some contents of conﬁdentiality, such as patenting and/or commercial development possibilities. As a result, these dissertations through submission to degree databases may be delayed disclosure for years. We collected LIS doctoral dissertations from university/institute dissertation databases and public dissertation databases, therefore, the research may missed a small amount of dissertations.
Notwithstanding its limitation, this study has mapped an intellectual structure of the research ﬁelds of LIS doctoral dissertations in China. In future, we will do a longitudinal study in order to gain a full understanding of historical and contemporary developments in research. In addition, future studies may carry out a comparative study between China and oversea countries to integrate into the global trend.
Doctoral dissertation is an underdeveloped unit of analysis in contemporary bibliometric research. With the same view as the other researchers (Andersen and Hammarfelt 123 Doctoral dissertations of Library and Information Science in China 2011), we believe that the analysis of doctoral dissertations can provide valuable insights into the growth and structure of scientiﬁc ﬁelds and disciplines.
Acknowledgments This study was sponsored by Jiangsu Province Graduate Students Research and Innovation Plan (CXZZ11_0059).
References An, X. Y., & Wu, Q. Q. (2011). Co-word analysis of the trends in stem cells ﬁeld based on subject heading weighting. Scientometrics, 88(1), 133–144. doi:10.1007/s11192-011-0374-1.
Andersen, J. P., & Hammarfelt, B. (2011). Price revisited: on the growth of dissertations in eight research ﬁelds. Scientometrics, 88(2), 371–383. doi:10.1007/s11192-011-0408-8.
Anwar, M. A. (2004). From doctoral dissertation to publication: a study of 1995 American graduates in library and information sciences. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 36(4), 151–157.
Bacher, J. (2002). Cluster analysis. Nuremberg: University of Erlangen—Nuremberg.
Bauin, S., Michelet, B., Schweighoffer, M. G., & Vermeulin, P. (1991). Using bibliometrics in strategic analysis: understanding chemical reactions at the CNRS. Scientometrics, 22(1), 113–137.
Blei, D. M., & Lafferty, J. D. (2007). A correlated topic model of science. Annals of Applied Statistics, 1(1), 17–35. doi:10.1214/07-aoas114.
Blei, D. M., Ng, A. Y., & Jordan, M. I. (2003). Latent Dirichlet allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3, 993–1022.
Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Freeman, L. C. (2002). Ucinet for Windows: software for social network analysis. Harvard: Analytic Technologies.
Bredillet, C. N. (2009). Mapping the dynamics of the project management ﬁeld: project management in action (part 2). Project Management Journal, 40(2), 2–6.
Breimer, L. H. (1996). Age, sex and standards of current doctoral theses by Swedish medical graduates.
Scientometrics, 37(1), 171–176. doi:10.1007/bf02093493.
Buttlar, L. (1999). Information sources in library and information science doctoral research. Library & Information Science Research, 21(2), 227–245. doi:10.1016/s0740-8188(99)00005-5.
Cahlik, T. (2000). Comparison of the maps of science. Scientometrics, 49(3), 373–387. doi:10.1023/ a:1010581421990.
Callon, M., Courtial, J. P., & Laville, F. (1991). Co-word analysis as a tool for describing the network of interactions between basic and technological research—the case of polymer chemistry. Scientometrics, 22(1), 155–205. doi:10.1007/bf02019280.
Cambrosio, A., Limoges, C., Courtial, J. P., & Laville, F. (1993). Historical scientometrics—mapping over 70 years of biological safety research with co-word analysis. Scientometrics, 27(2), 119–143.
Coulter, N., Monarch, I., & Konda, S. (1998). Software engineering as seen through its research literature: a study in co-word analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(13), 1206–1223. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-4571(1998)49:13\1206:aid-asi7[3.3.co;2-6.
Courtial, J. P., Callon, M., & Sigogneau, A. (1993). The use of patent titles for identifying the topics of invention and forecasting trends. Scientometrics, 26(2), 231–242. doi:10.1007/bf02016216.
Ding, Y. (2011). Community detection: topological vs. topical. Journal of Informetrics, 5(4), 498–514. doi:
Ding, Y., Chowdhury, G. G., & Foo, S. (2000). Incorporating the results of co-word analyses to increase
search variety for information retrieval. Journal of Information Science, 26(6), 429–451. doi:
Ding, Y., Chowdhury, G. G., & Foo, S. (2001). Bibliometric cartography of information retrieval research by using co-word analysis. Information Processing and Management, 37(6), 817–842. doi:10.1016/ s0306-4573(00)00051-0.
Dong, X. Y. (1997). Transition of library and information science education in China: problems and perspective. International Information & Library Review, 29(1), 1–12.
Eschenfelder, A. H. (1980). Magnetic bubble technology. New York: Springer.
Finlay, C. S., Sugimoto, C. R., Li, D. F., & Russell, T. G. (2012). LIS dissertation titles and abstracts (1930–2009): where have all the librar* gone? Library Quarterly, 82(1), 29–46. doi:10.1086/662945.
123 Q.-J. Zong et al.
Franklin, R. E., & Jaeger, P. T. (2007). A decade of doctorates: an examination of dissertations written by African American Women in library and information studies. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 48(3), 187–201.
Gao, S. J., Yu, W. Z., & Luo, F. P. (2009). Citation analysis of PhD thesis at Wuhan University, China.
Library Collections Acquisitions & Technical Services, 33(1), 8–16. doi:10.1016/j.lcats.2009.03.001.
Gordon, A. D. (1996). Hierarchical classiﬁcation. In P. Arabie, L. J. Hubert, & G. de Soete (Eds.), Clustering and classiﬁcation. River Edge: World Scientiﬁc Publishing.
Grifﬁths, T. L., & Steyvers, M. (2004). Finding scientiﬁc topics. Proceedings of the National academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 101, 5228–5235. doi:10.1073/pnas.0307752101.
He, Q. (1999). Knowledge discovery through co-word analysis. Library Trends, 48(1), 133–159.
Herubel, J. (2007). Pre 1990 French doctoral dissertations in philosophy: a Bibliometric proﬁle of a canonical discipline (Proceedings of ISSI 2007: 11th International Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, Vols I and II).
Jin, M. (2010). Survey research on method system of Ph.D. thesis of Library and Information Science in China. Library and Information Service (in China), 54(15), 81–85.
Kushkowski, J. D., Parsons, K. A., & Wiese, W. H. (2003). Master’s and doctoral thesis citations: analysis and trends of a longitudinal study. Portal-Libraries and the Academy, 3(3), 459-479, doi:10.1353/ pla.2003.0062.
Law, J., Bauin, S., Courtial, J. P., & Whittaker, J. (1988). Policy and the mapping of scientiﬁc change—a coword analysis of research into environmental acidiﬁcation. Scientometrics, 14(3–4), 251–264. doi:
Lee, B., & Jeong, Y. I. (2008). Mapping Korea’s national R&D domain of robot technology by using the coword analysis. Scientometrics, 77(1), 3–19. doi:10.1007/s11192-007-1819-4.
Li, D. F., Ding, Y., Shuai, X., Bollen, J., Tang, J., Chen, S. S., et al. (2012). Adding community and dynamic to topic models. Journal of Informetrics, 6(2), 237–253. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2011.11.004.
Liu, G. Y., Hu, J. M., & Wang, H. L. (2011). A co-word analysis of digital library ﬁeld in China.
Scientometrics, 1–15. doi:10.1007/s11192-011-0586-4.
Lurie, S. J., Fogg, T. T., & Dozier, A. M. (2009). Social network analysis as a method of assessing institutional culture: three case studies. Academic Medicine, 84(8), 1029–1035. doi:10.1097/ACM.
Macauley, P., Evans, T., & Pearson, M. (2010). Classifying Australian PhD theses: linking research and library practices. Australian Academic & Research Libraries, 41(1), 1–13.
Maimon, O., & Rokach, L. (2005). Data mining and knowledge discovery handbook. Heidelberg: Springer.
Milojevic, S., Sugimoto, C. R., Yan, E. J., & Ding, Y. (2011). The cognitive structure of Library and Information Science: analysis of article title words. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(10), 1933–1953. doi:10.1002/asi.21602.
Neff, M. W., & Corley, E. A. (2009). 35 years and 160,000 articles: a bibliometric exploration of the evolution of ecology. Scientometrics, 80(3), 657–682. doi:10.1007/s11192-008-2099-3.
Persson, O., Danell, R., & Schneider, J. W. (2009). How to use Bibexcel for various types of bibliometric ˚¨ analysis. In F. Astrom, R. Danell, B. Larsen, & J. W. Schneider (Eds.), Celebrating scholarly communication studies: a Festschrift for Olle Persson at his 60th Birthday (pp. 9–24). Leuven: International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics.
Pruteanu-Malinici, I., Ren, L., Paisley, J., Wang, E., & Carin, L. (2010). Hierarchical Bayesian modeling of topics in time-stamped documents. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 32(6), 996–1011. doi:10.1109/tpami.2009.125.
Rip, A., & Courtial, J. P. (1984). Co-word maps of biotechnology—An example of cognitive scientometrics.
Scientometrics, 6(6), 381–400. doi:10.1007/bf02025827.
Ritzhaupt, A. D., Stewart, M., Smith, P., & Barron, A. E. (2010). An investigation of distance education in North American research literature using co-word analysis. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 11(1), 37–60.
Rosen-Zvi, M., Grifftihs, T., Steyvers, M., & Smyth, P (2004). The author-topic model for authors and documents. In 20th conference on Uncertainty in artiﬁcial intelligence, Banff, Canada (pp. 487–494).
Rzeszutek, R., Androutsos, D., & Kyan, M. (2010). Self-organizing maps for topic trend discovery. IEEE Signal Processing Letters, 17(6), 607–610. doi:10.1109/lsp.2010.2048940.
Schlater, G. A., & Thomison, D. (1974). Library science dissertations, 1925–1972: an annotated bibliography. Littleton: Libraries Unlimited.
Schlater, G. A., & Thomison, D. (1982). Library science dissertations, 1973–1981: an annotated bibliography. Littleton: Libraries Unlimited.
Small, H. (1973). Co-citation in the scientic literature: a new measure of the relationship between two documents. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 24(4), 265–269.
123Doctoral dissertations of Library and Information Science in China
Small, H., & Grifth, B. C. (1974). The structure of scientic literatures I: identifying and graphing specialties.
Science Studies, 4(1), 17–40.
Sugimoto, C. R. (2011). Looking across communicative genres: a call for inclusive indicators of interdisciplinarity. Scientometrics, 86(2), 449–461. doi:10.1007/s11192-010-0275-8.
Sugimoto, C. R., Li, D. F., Russell, T. G., Finlay, S. C., & Ding, Y. (2011). The shifting sands of disciplinary development: analyzing North American Library and Information Science dissertations using latent dirichlet allocation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(1), 185–204. doi:10.1002/asi.21435.
Tang, J., Jin, R. M., & Zhang, J. (2008). A topic modeling approach and its integration into the random walk framework for academic search. In D. Gunopulos, F. Turini, C. Zaniolo, N. Ramakrishnan, & X.
D. Wu (Eds.), Icdm 2008: Eighth IEEE International Conference on Data Mining, Proceedings. IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (pp. 1055–1060).
Turner, W. A. (1988). Packaging information for peer review: New co-word analysis techniques. In A. F. J.
Van Raari (Ed.), Handbook of quantitative studies of science and technohgy (pp. 291–323). Netherlands: Elsevier Science Publishers.
Uzun, A. (2002). Library and information science research in developing countries and Eastern European countries: a brief bibliometric perspective. International Information & Library Review, 34(1), 21–33.
Villarroya, A., Barrios, M., Borrego, A., & Frias, A. (2008). PhD theses in Spain: a gender study covering the years 1990–2004. Scientometrics, 77(3), 469–483. doi:10.1007/s11192-007-1965-8.
Wang, Z. J., Pan, Y. C., Xu, F., & Yan, B. N. (2009). The analysis of journal papers of Information Science doctors in China. Library and Information (in China), 29(2), 51–56.