Libraries at University of Nebraska-Lincoln
A Scoping Review of Research Ethics and Practices in Library and Information Science in Scopus and Library and Information Science Source Databases
Date of this Version
Introduction and Background: Library and information science scholars are partially aware of the research ethics regarding data falsification, fabrication, data cooking, gifted authorship, neglected authorship, and other factors. Such activities are not only unethical but may equally cause harm to the academic community and society. Purpose: This paper aims to identify the gaps in studies focusing on research ethics and practices in Library and Information Science in the Scopus and Library and Information Science Source Databases. The review seeks to respond to research questions such as what is the scope of articles focusing on research ethics and practices between 2011 and 2021; what are the features of articles focusing on research ethics and practices in the Scopus and LISS domain; to what extent is the African research on ethics and practices and LISS reflected in the domain; and what are the implications of studies focusing on research ethics as reported in the identified literature? Methodology: Databases searched include the Scopus and Library and Information Science Source for articles published between 2011 and 2021. Advanced search strategies are used as well as thematic analysis. Result: Out of 190 documents identified from the databases, 70 were eligible for review while 13 were included in the scoping review. The majority of the articles focusing on research ethics and practices were published between 2016 and 2021. The year 2021 witnessed the highest number of publications, while the lowest was in 2014. The majority of studies published in the LIS domain emerged from developed countries. However, few were published by African scholars in Scopus and LISS focusing on research ethics and practices. Implications: This paper has implications for LIS researchers and policymakers. Practical implications include the control and reduction of data falsifications, data cooking, and unethical research practices among LIS researchers. Implications for efficient knowledge management for sustainable development are also prominent in this paper. Conclusions: Given that limited articles focus on the subject identified in the domain, African scholars need to contribute immensely towards literature addressing research ethics. They also need to engage the researchers, information managers, and policymakers to empower librarians with knowledge of how to manage scholarly publications in academic libraries.