L’état des frontières sous-disciplinaires en bibliothéconomie et sciences de l’information
entre porosité et étanchéité
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.29173/cais1894Keywords:
bibliothéconomie et sciences de l'information, disciplines, frontière disciplinaire, recherche doctorale, interdisciplinaritéAbstract
Cette présentation d’une thèse de doctorat en cours explore la structure disciplinaire de la bibliothéconomie et des sciences de l’information (BSI) en analysant 206 thèses canadiennes complétées entre 2010 et 2024. L’étude examine la répartition des recherches par sous-champs, l’influence des disciplines externes, le corpus de littérature commun et les choix épistémiques des thèses. À travers des analyses bibliométriques et qualitatives, elle vise à mieux comprendre la fragmentation de la discipline et les interactions interdisciplinaires, tout en mettant en lumière les implications pour la cohésion et le développement de la BSI. Des résultats préliminaires seront disponibles pour la conférence.
The State of Sub-Disciplinary Borders in Library and Information Science : Between Porosity and Impermeabiliy
Abstract
This presentation of a doctoral thesis in progress explores the disciplinary structure of library and Information science (LIS) by analyzing 206 Canadian theses completed between 2010 and 2024. The study looks at the distribution of research by sub-categories, the impact of external disciplines, the common literary corpus and the theses’ epistemic choices. Through bibliometric and qualitative analyses, the study aims to better comprehend the fragmentation of the discipline and the interdisciplinary interactions, while highlighting the implications for the cohesion and development of LIS. Preliminary results will be available at the conference.
Keywords
Library and information science; disciplines; Disciplinary borders; PhD research; Interdisciplinarity
References
Abbott, A. (2001). Chaos of Disciplines. The University of Chicago Press.
ALA-Accredited Programs | ALA. (s. d.). https://www.ala.org/educationcareers/accreditedprograms/directory
Albright, K. (2010). Multidisciplinarity in Information Behavior: Expanding Boundaries or Fragmentation of the Field? Libri, 60(2), 98‑106. https://doi.org/10.1515/libr.2010.009
Åström, F. (2007). Changes in the LIS research front: Time-sliced cocitation analyses of LIS journal articles, 1990–2004. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(7), 947‑957. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20567
Braun, V. et Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77‑101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Chang, Y.-W. (2018). Exploring the interdisciplinary characteristics of library and information science (LIS) from the perspective of interdisciplinary LIS authors. Library & Information Science Research, 40(2), 125‑134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2018.06.004
Chang, Y.-W. (2019). Are articles in library and information science (LIS) journals primarily contributed to by LIS authors? Scientometrics, 121(1), 81‑104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03186-w
Chang, Y.-W., Huang, M.-H. et Lin, C.-W. (2015). Evolution of research subjects in library and information science based on keyword, bibliographical coupling, and co-citation analyses. Scientometrics, 105(3), 2071‑2087. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1762-8
Chu, H. et Ke, Q. (2017). Research methods: What’s in the name? Library & Information Science Research, 39(4), 284‑294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2017.11.001
Fabiani, J.-L. (2013). Vers la fin du modèle disciplinaire ? Hermès, La Revue, 67(3), 90‑94. https://doi.org/10.4267/2042/51891
Figuerola, C. G., García Marco, F. J. et Pinto, M. (2017). Mapping the evolution of library and information science (1978–2014) using topic modeling on LISA. Scientometrics, 112(3), 1507‑1535. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2432-9
Hammarfelt, B. (2020). Discipline. Knowledge Organization, 47(3), 244‑256. https://doi.org/10.5771/0943-7444-2020-3-244
Han, X. (2020). Evolution of research topics in LIS between 1996 and 2019: an analysis based on latent Dirichlet allocation topic model. Scientometrics, 125(3), 2561‑2595. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03721-0
Hawkins, D. T., Larson, S. E. et Caton, B. Q. (2003). Information science abstracts: Tracking the literature of information science. Part 2: A new taxonomy for information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technolog, 54(8), 771. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.10275
Hoffman, S. J. (1985). Specialization + Fragmentation = Extermination: A Formula for the Demise of Graduate Education. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 56(6), 19‑22. https://doi.org/10.1080/07303084.1985.10603786
Hsiao, T.-M. et Chen, K. (2020). The dynamics of research subfields for library and information science: an investigation based on word bibliographic coupling. Scientometrics, 125(1), 717‑737. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03645-9
Jacob, J. A. (2017). The need for disciplines in the modern research university. Dans The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity (2nd éd., p. 35‑39). Oxford University Press.
Järvelin, K. et Vakkari, P. (1990). Content Analysis of Research Articles in Library and Information Science. Library and Information Science Research, 12(4), 395‑421.
Järvelin, K. et Vakkari, P. (1993). The evolution of library and information science 1965-1985: A content analysis of journal articles. Information Processing and Management, 29(1), 129‑144. https://doi.org/10.1016/0306-4573(93)90028-C
Jeong, D. Y. et Kim, S. J. (2005). Knowledge structure of library and information science in South Korea. Library & Information Science Research, 27(1), 51‑72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2004.09.004
Kobayashi, V. B., Mol, S. T., Berkers, H. A., Kismihók, G. et Den Hartog, D. N. (2018). Text Classification for Organizational Researchers: A Tutorial. Organizational Research Methods, 21(3), 766‑799. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428117719322
Lopez, P. (2009). GROBID: Combining Automatic Bibliographic Data Recognition and Term Extraction for Scholarship Publications. M. Agosti, J. Borbinha, S. Kapidakis, C. Papatheodorou et G. Tsakonas (dir.), Berlin, Heidelberg (p. 473‑474). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04346-8_62
Lund, B. D. (2020). Who really contributes to information science research? An analysis of disciplinarity and nationality of contributors to ten top journals. Malaysian Journal of Library and Information Science, 25(3), 15‑29. https://doi.org/10.22452/mjlis.vol25no3.2
Ma, J. et Lund, B. (2021). The evolution and shift of research topics and methods in library and information science. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 72(8), 1059‑1074. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24474
Madsen, D. (2016). Liberating interdisciplinarity from myth. An exploration of the discursive construction of identities in information studies. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(11), 2697‑2709. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23622
Milojević, S., Sugimoto, C. R., Yan, E. et 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21602
Mongeon, P., Gracey, C., Riddle, P., Hare, M., Simard, M.-A. et Sauvé, J.-S. (2023). Mapping information research in Canada= Cartographier la recherche en science de l’information au Canada. The Canadian journal of information and library science= La revue canadienne des sciences de l’information et de bibliothéconomie, 46(2). https://www.erudit.org/en/journals/cjils/2023-v46-n2-cjils08989/1108307ar/abstract/
Petras, V. (2023). The identity of information science. Journal of Documentation, 80(3), 579‑596. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-04-2023-0074
Pettigrew, K. E. et McKechnie, L. (E F. ). (2001). The use of theory in information science research. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 52(1), 62‑73.
Prebor, G. (2010). Analysis of the interdisciplinary nature of library and information science. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 42(4), 256‑267. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961000610380820
Rao, S. X., Egger, P. H. et Zhang, C. (2023, 11 juillet). Hierarchical Classification of Research Fields in the « Web of Science » Using Deep Learning. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2302.00390
Rochester, M. et Vakkari, P. (1998). International LIS Research: A Comparison of National Trends. IFLA Journal, 24(3), 166‑175. https://doi.org/10.1177/034003529802400305
Saracevic, T. (1979). An essay on the past and future (?) of information science education—II: Unresolved problems of “externalities” of education. Information Processing & Management, 15(6), 291‑301. https://doi.org/10.1016/0306-4573(79)90053-0.
Sile, L., Guns, R., Vandermoere, F., Sivertsen, G. et Engels, T. (2021). Tracing the context in disciplinary classifications: A bibliometric pairwise comparison of five classifications of journals in the social sciences and humanities. Quantitative Science Studies, 2(1), 65‑88. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00110
Smith, L. C. (1992). Interdisciplinarity: approaches to understanding library and information science as an intrdisciplinary field. Dans Conceptions of library and information science: historical, empirical, and theoretical perspectives: proceedings of the International conference held for the celebration of 20th anniversary of the Department of information studies, University of Tampere, Finland, 26-28 August 1991 (p. 253‑267). T. Graham.
Song, H., Eberl, J.-M. et Eisele, O. (2020). Less Fragmented Than We Thought? Toward Clarification of a Subdisciplinary Linkage in Communication Science, 2010–2019. Journal of Communication, 70(3), 310‑334. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqaa009
Song, Y., Zhu, L. et Shu, F. (2021). On the evolution of library and information science doctoral dissertation topics in China. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 53(2), 298‑306. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961000620948573
Sugimoto, C. R., Li, D., Russell, T. G., Finlay, S. C. et Ding, Y. (2010). 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21435
Sugimoto, C. R. et Weingart, S. (2015). The kaleidoscope of disciplinarity. Journal of Documentation, 71(4), 775‑794. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-06-2014-0082
Sungjae, P., Jisue, L. et M, H. J. (2022). A Systematic Review on the Application of the Theory of Information Worlds. Journal of Information Science Theory and Practice, 10(4), 87‑109. https://doi.org/10.1633/JISTaP.2022.10.4.7
Tenopir, C. (1985). Information Science Education in the United States: Characteristics and Curricula. Education for Information, 3(1), 3‑28. https://doi.org/10.3233/EFI-1985-3102
Thakuria, A. et Deka, D. (2024). A decadal study on identifying latent topics and research trends in open access LIS journals using topic modeling approach. Scientometrics, 129(7), 3841‑3869. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-024-05058-4
Tuomaala, O., Järvelin, K. et Vakkari, P. (2014). Evolution of library and information science, 1965–2005: Content analysis of journal articles. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(7), 1446‑1462. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23034
Vakkari, P. (2024). What characterizes LIS as a fragmenting discipline? Journal of Documentation, 80(7), 60‑77. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-10-2023-0207
Vakkari, P., Chang, Y.-W. et Järvelin, K. (2022). Disciplinary contributions to research topics and methodology in Library and Information Science—Leading to fragmentation? Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 73(12), 1706‑1722. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24690
Vakkari, P., Järvelin, K. et Chang, Y.-W. (2023). The association of disciplinary background with the evolution of topics and methods in Library and Information Science research 1995–2015. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 74(7), 811‑827. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24757
Varga, A. (2019). Shorter distances between papers over time are due to more cross-field references and increased citation rate to higher-impact papers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(44), 22094‑22099. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1905819116
Waltman, L. et van Eck, N. J. (2019). Field Normalization of Scientometric Indicators. Dans W. Glänzel, H. F. Moed, U. Schmoch et M. Thelwall (dir.), Springer Handbook of Science and Technology Indicators (p. 281‑300). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02511-3_11
Weingart, P. (2010). A short history of knowledge formations. Dans The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity (Oxford University Press). Oxford University Press.
Wiemann, J. M., Pingree, S. et Hawkins, R. P. (1988). Fragmentation in the Field—and the Movement Toward Integration in Communication Science. Human Communication Research, 15(2), 304‑310. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1988.tb00186.x
Zareef, M., Arif, M. et Jabeen, M. (2023). Research trends in LIS: The case of doctoral research in Pakistan, 1981–2021. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 09610006231161331. https://doi.org/10.1177/09610006231161331
Zhang, Chao, Wang, F., Huang, Y. et Chang, L. (2023). Interdisciplinarity of information science: an evolutionary perspective of theory application. Journal of Documentation, 80(2), 392‑426. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-07-2023-0135
Zhang, Chengzhi, Mao, Y. et Peng, S. (2024). Data-driven evolution of library and information science research methods (1990–2022): a perspective based on fine-grained method entities. Scientometrics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-024-05202-0
Zhang, Chengzhi, Wei, S., Zhao, Y. et Tian, L. (2023). Gender differences in research topic and method selection in library and information science: Perspectives from three top journals. Library & Information Science Research, 45(3), 101255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2023.101255
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Constance Poitras
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
