Narges Neshat; Zahra Sadat Alami
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Today, the index of scientific outputs is in the focus of policy makers and decision makers at national and international levels; However, it alone cannot be considered a definitive sign for the all-round growth and development of science; But the fact is that today many decisions ...
Read More
Background and Objectives: Today, the index of scientific outputs is in the focus of policy makers and decision makers at national and international levels; However, it alone cannot be considered a definitive sign for the all-round growth and development of science; But the fact is that today many decisions in the field of research and development are made based on the scientific outputs of countries and as a visual object, provide the possibility of comparison, judgment, and benchmarking.
Library and information science (LIS) has emerged, not only as a profession and the educational programme that supports it, but also as a research discipline. Research is needed to create new knowledge and there by contribute to the growth of LIS as a profession or discipline. If research and researcher are absent, non-existent or even scarce, there is no profession, but only an occupation grounded in techniques, routine and common sense. This is, of course, the important reason why research is conducted into library and information science (LIS), or why research products are important. That is why it is important to see what are the barriers to research outputs and how to overcome these barriers. Librarians and other information specialists such as faculty members must to development effectiveness in LIS with their scientific output and services. In this study we want to comparison of scientific products of faculty members of library and information science in research centers and determining the factors affecting it.
Methodology: Methodology is the means by which their searcher collects data, might consist of self-reports surveys, statistical analysis, or anather methods. This study has been done with cientometric approach and two methods of content analysis and survey. Survey was used to rate and compare scientific output. Then, based on the qualitative content analysis of texts related to this subject, the barriers to scientific production were extracted and designed in the form of a questionnaire.
Findings: As mentioned, one of the main pillars of science production is the scientific community and their scientific fertility; And faculty members are one of the most basic elements of this scientific fertility. One of the consequences and products of their performance is products that appear in the form of information sources such as books, articles, reports, standards, etc. It is due to the existence of such products and consumption trends in the scientific community that the index of scientific fertility makes sense in this field. The importance of this index is that it can be used to express the status of scientific research in quantitative language and measure it, and thus achieve an objective picture of them in different areas of a country. The findings of this study showed that the tendency to produce an article is greater than other information items. Persian is also the dominant language. The highest per capita scientific production is related to the Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization with 156 scientific productions. Next is the Iranian Institute of Information Science and Technology, and the Research Institute of Islamic Science and Culture.
Discussion: Among the Inhibiting factors scientific production, Individual barriers to scientific production among faculty members of the three centers of the Islamic Encyclopaedia Foundation, the Shiraz Science and Technology Information Center, and the Research Institute of Islamic Science and Culture have been more than other centers. So, the faculty members of the Academy of Persian Language and Literature, the Islamic Encyclopedia Foundation, and the Research Institute of Islamic Sciences and Culture have had most external barriers. Intra-organizational barriers are more common among the Institute of Islamic Sciences and Culture, the Academy of Persian Language and Literature, and the Islamic Encyclopedia Foundation and the National Library and Archives. Therefore, it is suggested that each of these research centers take action to remove these barriers. Another point is to pay attention to efficient and scientific management in these centers. Because in the shadow of optimal policy in this field, individual, internal and external organizational barriers can change their place with opportunities. The management of research centers must be able to use downstream forces and their creativity properly. Facilitate faculty members' access to the organization's research programs; Dissemination of research culture and promotion of the value and dignity of the faculty members of the studied research centers are also among the things that can be achieved through proper research management. In this study, inhibitory factors from the perspective of faculty members were considered; Therefore, to complete and compare the views, it is suggested that these factors be measured from the perspective of officials and managers of research centers and compared with the findings of the present study.
Fahimeh Babalhavaeji; Atefeh Zarei; Narges Neshat; Nadjla Hariri
Volume 6, Vol.6, No.13 , May 2014, , Pages 1-24
Abstract
Aim: The purpose of this study was to determine subject categories in Knowledge and Information Science for creating knowledge map of KIS. Method: The Delphi technique was used for collection of the required data. This qualitative research methodology helped facilitating and determining the main and ...
Read More
Aim: The purpose of this study was to determine subject categories in Knowledge and Information Science for creating knowledge map of KIS. Method: The Delphi technique was used for collection of the required data. This qualitative research methodology helped facilitating and determining the main and sub-main subject categories. The Delphi Panel was composed of 28 experts in KIS. The Statistical technique of t-test was applied for analyzing the results. Findings: The results obtained from Delphi Panel revealed that there was significant difference between the first stage and second stage in regards with 2nd (methodology), 3rd (Library & resource centers) and Sixth (User Services) subject categories. No significant differences were observed in other 11 subject categories. Conclusion: Results also indicated that KIS categories were changed from 13 subject categories to 14, namely: 1) General KIS, 2) KIS education, 3) Methodology , 4) Libraries and resource centers, 5) Management of libraries and information centers, 6) Technical or organizational knowledge, 7)User Services, 8) Use & User Studies, 9) Information storage and retrieval, 10) Library and ICT, 11) Publishing and distribution, 12) Social Issues Information, 13) Ethical and legal issues, and 14) Knowledge Management.
