saleh rahimi; mohammad mohammadi; mahmood moradi
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study was to identify the effective factors involved in the scientific outputs of public librarians in Kermanshah Province.Methodology: The research was applied in a survey method. The research population included 235 librarians of public libraries in Kermanshah province. The ...
Read More
Objective: The aim of this study was to identify the effective factors involved in the scientific outputs of public librarians in Kermanshah Province.Methodology: The research was applied in a survey method. The research population included 235 librarians of public libraries in Kermanshah province. The research sample was 146 librarian based on Cochran's formula. The data gathering tool was Ebegbulam and Jacintha (2016) questionnaire, which after validation was distributed among the research sample. Simple random sampling method was used. Descriptive statistical methods and inferential were used to analyze the data.Findings: Findings showed that the research outoput among librarians was low. Responses in the motivational sector, have declared "the desire to promote themselves in the field of occupational activity" and "personal interest in research" as the most important motivational factors, respectively. In section of factors influence the increase in research, the " The desire to upgrade and progress" and "the desire to improve their performance in the workplace" are the most important factors. The barriers of doing research, the "lack of motivation for librarians to do research" and " Lack of fluency in foreign languages" were the most important obstacles. Also, "allocation of research funding to librarians" was the most effective way of increasing the scientific production of librarians. Conclusion: Providing incentive programs for librarians to do research, preparing facilities for their education continuing and setting up research groups based on librarians, is proposed to plan for the development of scientific and research capabilities of the them.
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.
Hossein Moradimoghadam; Rouhollah Khademi; Hamid Keshavarz
Abstract
Background and Objectives: One of the areas of research and study in Scientometrics is scientific collaborative studies. Katz and Martin (1997) define scientific collaboration as working with other researchers in order to achieve common goals for the production of new knowledge. This collaboration has ...
Read More
Background and Objectives: One of the areas of research and study in Scientometrics is scientific collaborative studies. Katz and Martin (1997) define scientific collaboration as working with other researchers in order to achieve common goals for the production of new knowledge. This collaboration has several aspects one of which is co-authorship. Co-authorship can occur in scientific productions such as paper, notebooks and so on. In recent years, scientific collaboration, and especially co-authorship, has grown exponentially among authors and researchers. Perhaps this increasing growth can be attributed to the benefits that scientific collaboration holds for authors and their works. This research evaluates the scientific production of researchers based on Scientometrics indicators such as growth rate, cooperative indices, the most prolific researchers and their Hirsch index, analyzing the components of the co-authorship network of researchers, and investigating the structures existing in co-authorship networks using social network analysis and based on the Centrality measure such as degree, betweenness, eigenvectors and closeness. Also, the density measures, the coefficient of clustering, the distance between nodes and subgroups are also calculated and determined. The aim of this article was to study the scientific outputs of Semnan university researchers in term of quantitative indexes (number of outputs, research area, and year) and qualitative indexes (number of citations and H-Index). Mapping the co-author network of Semnan university researchers in the Web of Science database was the other purpose of the present paper. Methodology: The research was conducted based on Scientometrics methods. The research population included all the documents which mentioned Semnan University as their affiliation and were indexed in Web of Science from 1990 to 2015. Totally, 2106 documents were indexed in this timespan. The co-author network was mapped and analyzed by Coau.exe, Ucinet and Netdraw. In order to analyze the data, different software and measures were used. For this purpose, the data were first analyzed by coauthor.exe software and the authorship matrix was formed. The obtained matrix was a symmetric matrix 194 * 194, in which the diagonal cells were set to zero. Then the matrix was imported into the UCInet software to provide the proper format required for drawing software. After obtaining the outputs from the UCInet software, to draw up a map of the co-authorship the NetDraw software was used. Also, for all authors and researchers of the Semnan University, the h index was calculated using the Web of Science and the authors with the highest h index were identified. Findings: The results showed that Engineering (39%), Physics (19.5) and Mathematics (14%) were the subjects to which Semnan university researchers contributed. Totally, in the time span investigated, Iranian researchers produced 272019 documents out of which 2106 belonged to Semnan University. Therefore, this university ranked 30 among the Iranian universities. During the period studied, Semnan University produced 0.0049% of the universal scientific outputs. The results of the growth rate calculation indicated 43.22 for Semnan University researchers in the past fifty years that reveals a promising rising growth rate. Amjadi, Gorji and Orouji with 25, 23 and 15 H-Indexs ranked first to third, respectively. In term of citation, Amjadi ranked first with 2126 citations and Gorji with 1341 and Orouji with 629 citations were in the next ranks. Investigating the degree from among the centrality measurements was also calculated and the results showed that Gorji, Fereydoun and Asghari were in the top. The highest co-authoring rate occurred in 2005 which included 3 authors. As regards the fields of study, mathematics was the highest single-author subject. After obtaining the number of co-authorship of documents in different years, three indicators of co-authorship, including the cooperation index, degree of collaborative and Collaborative coefficient, were obtained, which showed that these collaborative indicators have increased significantly during the studied years. Also, there has been an increasing trend in two indicators of degree of collaborative and collaborative coefficient with several fluctuations over several years in general. The average of these three indicators for the whole years was 2.52, 0.84 and 0.50 respectively. Discussion: The results of data analysis showed that, although the flow of co-authorship among the Semnan University researchers has fluctuated in recent years, during the studied period, the researchers of Semnan University have tended to write co-authorship. Generally, documents with three authors were the most co-authorship. The results also showed that the co-authorship network of Semnan University researchers consisted of 6 main components and 7 isolated authors. The largest cluster composed of 171 authors. The smaller cluster comprised of 7 authors and the other clusters included two. Also, subject areas of engineering, physics and mathematics scored the highest number of articles among Semnan University researchers.
