Libraries at University of Nebraska-Lincoln

 

Date of this Version

5-2020

Document Type

Article

Citation

  1. Benbasat, I., and Zmud, R. W. (2003). The identity crisis within the IS discipline: Defining and communicating the discipline’s core properties. MIS Quarterly, 27(2), 183-194.
  2. Clark, J. G., Warren, J., & Au, Y. A. (2009). Assessing researcher publication productivity in the leading information systems journals: A 2003-2007 update. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 24(1), 225-254.
  3. Cocosila, M., Serenko, A. & Turel, O. Exploring the management information systems discipline: a scientometric study of ICIS, PACIS and ASAC. Scientometrics, 87, 1–16 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0331-4
  4. Cooper, R. B., Blair, D. & Pao, M. (1993). Communicating MIS Research: A Citation Study of Journal Influence. Information Processing & Management, 29(1), 113-127.
  5. Culnan, M. J. (1987). Mapping the Intellectual Structure of MIS, 1980 – 1985. A Co-citation Analysis. MIS Quarterly, 11(3), pp 341-353.
  6. Dearden, J. (1972). MIS is a mirage. Harvard Business Review, 50(1), 90-99.
  7. Frame, J. D. (1977). Mainstream Research in Latin America and Caribbean. Interciencia, 2, 143-148.
  8. Garcia, P., et al. (2005). Evolution of Spanish Scientific Production in International Obstetrics and Gynecology Journals during the period 1986-2002. Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, 123, 150-156.
  9. Katerattanakul, P., Han, B., and Rea, A. (2006). Is information system a reference discipline?. Communications of the ACM, 49(5), 114-1148.
  10. Kuhn, T. (1996). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 3rd edition, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.
  11. Lotka, A. J. (1926). Frequency distribution of scientific productivity. Journal of Washington Academic Science, 16(12), 317-323.
    1. Lowry, P. B., Romans, D., & Curtis, A. (2004). Global Journal Prestige and Supporting Disciplines: A Scientometric Study of Information Systems Journals. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 5(2), 29-77.
  12. Mason, R.O., and Mitroff, I. I. (1973). A program for research on management information systems. Management Science, 19(5), 475-487.
    1. Mohanty, B. Sahoo, J. & Dash, N. K.(2018). Bibliometric Indicators for Assessing the Quality of Scholarly Communications: A Case Study on International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal). 2158. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/2158.
  13. Mylonopoulos, N., & Theoharakis, V. (2001). Global Perceptions of IS Journals. Communications of the ACM, 9(44), 29-33.
  14. Nevo, S., Nevo, D., & Ein-Dor, P. (2009). Thirty Years of IS Research: Core Artifacts and Academic Identity. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 25, pp-pp. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.02524.
  15. Palvia, P., Pinjani, P., and Sibley, E. H. (2007). A profile of information systems research published in Information and Management. Information and Management, 44(1), 1-11.
  16. Peffers, K., & Ya, T. (2003). Identifying and Evaluating the Universe of Outlets for Information Systems Research: Ranking the Journals. JITTA : Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application, 5(1), 63-84.
  17. Sahoo, J., Meher, G. and Mohanty, B., (2017). Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management: A Bibliometric Analysis. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal). 1638. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/1638
  18. Sevukan, R. et. al. (2007). Research Output of Faculties of Plant Sciences in Central Universities of India: a Bibliometric Study. Annals of Library and Information Sciences, 54, 129-139.
  19. Stanely, M. H. R. et al. (1995). Zipf’s plot and the size distribution of firms. Economic Letters, 49, 453-457.
  20. Subramanian, K. (1983). Bibliometric studies of research collaboration: a review. Journal of Information Science, 6(1), 33-38.
  21. Sugimoto, C. R., Pratt, J. A., & Hauser, K. (2008). Using field cocitation analysis to assess reciprocal and shared impact of LIS/MIS fields. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(9), 1441-1453. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20863

Abstract

The present paper aims to enumerate the research impact of scholarly communications using Scientometrics indicators through a case study. Though the impact, as well as visibility study of scholarly communications, is always a debatable topic due to the non-acceptance by different stakeholders, efforts have been made to analyze selective Scientometrics dimensions of the scholarly literature such as trends of authorship, the productivity of authors, the ranking of institutions, geographic distribution, Productivity Index (PI), Domestic Collaborative Index (DCI), International Collaborative Index (ICI), Subject Term Activity Index (STAI) and applicability of Lotka’s Lw, Zipf’s Law. To illustrate these Scientometrics indicators, pertinent bibliographic information in the field of Information Systems (IS) is collected from the EBSCO database from one of the top-ranked IS journals namely ISM (Information Systems Management). The journal was chosen through clear evaluation criteria, and then fifteen years of relevant bibliographic data points were collected in a standardized format to meet the nine objectives of the study.

Download

Share

COinS