How important is software to library and information science research? A content analysis of full-text publications

Abstract We investigate the contributions of scientific software to library and information science (LIS) research using a sample of 572 English language articles published in 13 journals in 2008, 2011, 2014, and 2017. In particular, we examine the use and citation of software freely available for academic use in the LIS literature; we also explore the extent to which researchers follow software citation instructions provided by software developers. Twenty-seven percent of the LIS journal articles in our sample explicitly mention and use software. Yet although LIS researchers are becoming increasingly reliant on software that is freely available for academic use, many still fail to include formal citations of such software in their publications. We also find that a substantial proportion of researchers, when documenting software use, do not cite the software in the manner recommended by its developers.

[1]  Timothée Poisot.  Best publishing practices to improve user confidence in scientific software , 2015 .

[2]  C. Borgman,et al.  If We Share Data, Will Anyone Use Them? Data Sharing and Reuse in the Long Tail of Science and Technology , 2013, PloS one.

[3]  Xue Wang,et al.  How important is scientific software in bioinformatics research? A comparative study between international and Chinese research communities , 2018, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[4]  Heather A. Piwowar,et al.  Data reuse and the open data citation advantage , 2013, PeerJ.

[5]  James D. Herbsleb,et al.  Scientific software production: incentives and collaboration , 2011, CSCW.

[6]  Erjia Yan,et al.  Disciplinary differences of software use and impact in scientific literature , 2016, Scientometrics.

[7]  Douglas G. Altman,et al.  Practical statistics for medical research , 1990 .

[8]  Feng Liu,et al.  A survey of the practice of computational science , 2011, 2011 International Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis (SC).

[9]  Cassidy R. Sugimoto,et al.  The cognitive structure of Library and Information Science: Analysis of article title words , 2011, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[10]  Rongying Zhao,et al.  Impact evaluation of open source software: an Altmetrics perspective , 2016, Scientometrics.

[11]  Bryn Nelson.  Data sharing: Empty archives , 2009, Nature.

[12]  Erjia Yan,et al.  Examining the usage, citation, and diffusion patterns of bibliometric mapping software: A comparative study of three tools , 2018, J. Informetrics.

[13]  Kate E Decleene,et al.  Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association , 2011 .

[14]  D. Fanelli.  Do Pressures to Publish Increase Scientists' Bias? An Empirical Support from US States Data , 2010, PloS one.

[15]  James D. Herbsleb,et al.  Understanding the scientific software ecosystem and its impact: Current and future measures , 2015 .

[16]  Tun Lu,et al.  Meanings and boundaries of scientific software sharing , 2013, CSCW.

[17]  James Howison,et al.  Software in the scientific literature: Problems with seeing, finding, and using software mentioned in the biology literature , 2016, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[18]  Sandra Slaughter,et al.  Understanding the Motivations, Participation, and Performance of Open Source Software Developers: A Longitudinal Study of the Apache Projects , 2006, Manag. Sci..

[19]  Hoes Lane,et al.  IEEE EDITORIAL STYLE MANUAL , 2014 .

[20]  Arthur E. Kirkpatrick,et al.  Assessing open source software as a scholarly contribution , 2009, Commun. ACM.

[21]  James D. Herbsleb,et al.  From Personal Tool to Community Resource: What's the Extra Work and Who Will Do It? , 2015, CSCW.

[22]  Shayne Flint,et al.  A survey of scientific software development , 2010, ESEM '10.

[23]  T. E. Nisonger,et al.  The Perception of Library and Information Science Journals by LIS Education Deans and ARL Library Directors: A Replication of the Kohl–Davis Study , 2005 .

[24]  Janice Singer,et al.  How do scientists develop and use scientific software? , 2009, 2009 ICSE Workshop on Software Engineering for Computational Science and Engineering.

[25]  Kai Li,et al.  How is R cited in research outputs? Structure, impacts, and citation standard , 2017, J. Informetrics.

[26]  C. Tenopir,et al.  Data Sharing by Scientists: Practices and Perceptions , 2011, PloS one.

[27]  Qianqian Wang,et al.  Assessing the impact of software on science: A bootstrapped learning of software entities in full-text papers , 2015, J. Informetrics.

[28]  Melissa H. Cragin,et al.  Constructing Data Curation Profiles , 2009, Int. J. Digit. Curation.

[29]  Tiffany C. Chao.  Disciplinary reach: Investigating the impact of dataset reuse in the earth sciences , 2011, ASIST.

[30]  Micah Altman,et al.  An introduction to the joint principles for data citation , 2015 .

[31]  Mike Thelwall,et al.  How important is computing technology for library and information science research , 2015 .

[32]  Daniel S. Katz,et al.  Software citation principles , 2016, PeerJ Comput. Sci..

[33]  Yi-Hung Huang,et al.  Citing a Data Repository: A Case Study of the Protein Data Bank , 2015, PloS one.

[34]  Lorraine J. Hwang,et al.  Citations for Software: Providing Identification, Access and Recognition for Research Software , 2017, Int. J. Digit. Curation.

[35]  Brian A. Jacob,et al.  The Impact of Research Grant Funding on Scientific Productivity , 2007, Journal of public economics.

[36]  R. Cartes-Velásquez,et al.  Bibliometric analysis of articles published in ISI dental journals, 2007–2011 , 2013, Scientometrics.

[37]  Hailey Mooney,et al.  The Anatomy of a Data Citation: Discovery, Reuse, and Credit , 2012 .

[38]  Christopher W. Belter,et al.  Measuring the Value of Research Data: A Citation Analysis of Oceanographic Data Sets , 2014, PloS one.

[39]  Xianwen Wang,et al.  Science funding and research output: a study on 10 countries , 2011, Scientometrics.