Survival analysis of author keywords: An application to the library and information sciences area

"This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Peset, F, F Garzón-Farinós, LM González, X García-Massó, A Ferrer-Sapena, JL Toca-Herrera, and EA Sánchez-Pérez. 2019. "Survival Analysis of Author Keywords: An Application to the Library and Information Sciences Area." Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 71 (4). Wiley: 462-73. doi:10.1002/asi.24248, which has been published in final form at https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24248. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Self-Archiving."[EN] Our purpose is to adapt a statistical method for the analysis of discrete numerical series to the keywords appearing in scientific articles of a given area. As an example, we apply our methodological approach to the study of the keywords in the Library and Information Sciences (LIS) area. Our objective is to detect the new author keywords that appear in a fixed knowledge area in the period of 1 year in order to quantify the probabilities of survival for 10 years as a function of the impact of the journals where they appeared. Many of the new keywords appearing in the LIS field are ephemeral. Actually, more than half are never used again. In general, the terms most commonly used in the LIS area come from other areas. The average survival time of these keywords is approximately 3 years, being slightly higher in the case of words that were published in journals classified in the second quartile of the area. We believe that measuring the appearance and disappearance of terms will allow understanding some relevant aspects of the evolution of a discipline, providing in this way a new bibliometric approach.Peset Mancebo, MF.; Garzón Farinós, MF.; Gonzalez, L.; García-Massó, X.; Ferrer Sapena, A.; Toca-Herrera, JL.; Sánchez Pérez, EA. (2020). Survival analysis of author keywords: An application to the library and information sciences area. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology (Online). 71(4):462-473. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24248S462473714Aharony, N. (2011). Library and Information Science research areas: A content analysis of articles from the top 10 journals 2007–8. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 44(1), 27-35. doi:10.1177/0961000611424819Aizawa, A., & Kageura, K. (2003). Calculating association between technical terms based on co-occurrences in keyword lists of academic papers. Systems and Computers in Japan, 34(3), 85-95. doi:10.1002/scj.1197Athukorala, K., Hoggan, E., Lehtiö, A., Ruotsalo, T., & Jacucci, G. (2013). Information-seeking behaviors of computer scientists: Challenges for electronic literature search tools. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 50(1), 1-11. doi:10.1002/meet.14505001041The View from Here. (2007). Scholarship in the Digital Age. doi:10.7551/mitpress/7434.003.0012Box-Steffensmeier, J. M., Cunha, R. C., Varbanov, R. A., Hoh, Y. S., Knisley, M. L., & Holmes, M. A. (2015). Survival Analysis of Faculty Retention and Promotion in the Social Sciences by Gender. PLOS ONE, 10(11), e0143093. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0143093Brophy, J., & Bawden, D. (2005). Is Google enough? Comparison of an internet search engine with academic library resources. Aslib Proceedings, 57(6), 498-512. doi:10.1108/00012530510634235Buckland, M. K. (2012). Obsolescence in subject description. Journal of Documentation, 68(2), 154-161. doi:10.1108/00220411211209168Chang, Y.-W., Huang, M.-H., & 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. doi:10.1007/s11192-015-1762-8Chen, G., & Xiao, L. (2016). Selecting publication keywords for domain analysis in bibliometrics: A comparison of three methods. Journal of Informetrics, 10(1), 212-223. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2016.01.006Cheng, F.-F., Huang, Y.-W., Yu, H.-C., & Wu, C.-S. (2018). Mapping knowledge structure by keyword co-occurrence and social network analysis. Library Hi Tech, 36(4), 636-650. doi:10.1108/lht-01-2018-0004Colley, A., & Maltby, J. (2008). Impact of the Internet on our lives: Male and female personal perspectives. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(5), 2005-2013. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2007.09.002Dehdarirad, T., Villarroya, A., & Barrios, M. (2014). Research trends in gender differences in higher education and science: a co-word analysis. Scientometrics, 101(1), 273-290. doi:10.1007/s11192-014-1327-2Ding, Y., Chowdhury, G. G., & Foo, S. (2001). Bibliometric cartography of information retrieval research by using co-word analysis. Information Processing & Management, 37(6), 817-842. doi:10.1016/s0306-4573(00)00051-0Dotsika, F., & Watkins, A. (2017). Identifying potentially disruptive trends by means of keyword network analysis. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 119, 114-127. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2017.03.020Figuerola, C. G., García Marco, F. J., & Pinto, M. (2017). Mapping the evolution of library and information science (1978–2014) using topic modeling on LISA. Scientometrics, 112(3), 1507-1535. doi:10.1007/s11192-017-2432-9Gil-Leiva, I., & Alonso-Arroyo, A. (2007). Keywords given by authors of scientific articles in database descriptors. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(8), 1175-1187. doi:10.1002/asi.20595Halevi, G., & Moed, H. F. (2013). The thematic and conceptual flow of disciplinary research: A citation context analysis of thejournal of informetrics, 2007. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(9), 1903-1913. doi:10.1002/asi.22897Michael Hall, C. (2011). Publish and perish? Bibliometric analysis, journal ranking and the assessment of research quality in tourism. Tourism Management, 32(1), 16-27. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2010.07.001Han H. Gui J. &Xu S.(2014).Revealing research themes and their evolutionary trends using bibliometric data based on strategic diagrams (pp. 653–659).https://doi.org/10.1109/ISCC-C.2013.121Hjørland, B. (2000). Library and information science: practice, theory, and philosophical basis. Information Processing & Management, 36(3), 501-531. doi:10.1016/s0306-4573(99)00038-2Hjørland B. (2017).Library and information science (LIS). In Encyclopedia of Knowledge Organization. Retrieved fromhttp://www.isko.org/cyclo/lis.Hjørland, B., & Albrechtsen, H. (1995). Toward a new horizon in information science: Domain-analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 46(6), 400-425. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-4571(199507)46:63.0.co;2-yHu, C.-P., Hu, J.-M., Deng, S.-L., & Liu, Y. (2013). A co-word analysis of library and information science in China. Scientometrics, 97(2), 369-382. doi:10.1007/s11192-013-1076-7Kevork, E. K., & Vrechopoulos, A. P. (2009). CRM literature: conceptual and functional insights by keyword analysis. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 27(1), 48-85. doi:10.1108/02634500910928362Khan, G. F., & Wood, J. (2015). Information technology management domain: emerging themes and keyword analysis. Scientometrics, 105(2), 959-972. doi:10.1007/s11192-015-1712-5Lee, S. (2016). A Study on Research Trends in Public Library Research in Korea Using Keyword Networks. Libri, 66(4). doi:10.1515/libri-2016-0052Leung, X. Y., Sun, J., & Bai, B. (2017). Bibliometrics of social media research: A co-citation and co-word analysis. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 66, 35-45. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2017.06.012Li, M. (2018). Classifying and ranking topic terms based on a novel approach: role differentiation of author keywords. Scientometrics, 116(1), 77-100. doi:10.1007/s11192-018-2741-7Liu, J., Tian, J., Kong, X., Lee, I., & Xia, F. (2018). Two decades of information systems: a bibliometric review. Scientometrics, 118(2), 617-643. doi:10.1007/s11192-018-2974-5McClure, C. R., & Bishop, A. (1989). The Status of Research in Library/Information Science: Guarded Optimism. College & Research Libraries, 50(2), 127-143. doi:10.5860/crl_50_02_127Mela, C. F., Roos, J., & Deng, Y. (2013). Invited Paper—A Keyword History of Marketing Science. Marketing Science, 32(1), 8-18. doi:10.1287/mksc.1120.0764Milojević, S., Sugimoto, C. R., Yan, E., & 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. doi:10.1002/asi.21602Niu, X., & Hemminger, B. M. (2011). A study of factors that affect the information-seeking behavior of academic scientists. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(2), 336-353. doi:10.1002/asi.21669Nosek, B. A., Spies, J. R., & Motyl, M. (2012). Scientific Utopia. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(6), 615-631. doi:10.1177/1745691612459058O’Mara-Eves, A., Thomas, J., McNaught, J., Miwa, M., & Ananiadou, S. (2015). Using text mining for study identification in systematic reviews: a systematic review of current approaches. Systematic Reviews, 4(1). doi:10.1186/2046-4053-4-5Onyancha, O. B. (2018). Forty-Five Years of LIS Research Evolution, 1971–2015: An Informetrics Study of the Author-Supplied Keywords. Publishing Research Quarterly, 34(3), 456-470. doi:10.1007/s12109-018-9590-3Peset F. Garzón‐Farinos F. González L. García‐Massó X. Ferrer‐Sapena A. Toca‐Herrera J. &Sánchez‐Perez E. (2018f). Supplementary material S6. Survival analysis (Porter Stemmer method). Retrieved fromhttps://figshare.com/s/ec0e34e0aebf5df48a7bRadhakrishnan, S., Erbis, S., Isaacs, J. A., & Kamarthi, S. (2017). Novel keyword co-occurrence network-based methods to foster systematic reviews of scientific literature. PLOS ONE, 12(3), e0172778. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0172778Rayward, W. B. (2005). The historical development of information infrastructures and the dissemination of knowledge: A personal reflection. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 31(4), 19-22. doi:10.1002/bult.1720310407Runkler T.A.&Bezdek J.C.(2000).Automatic keyword extraction with relational clustering and Levenshtein distances. Ninth IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems. FUZZ‐ IEEE 2000 (Cat. No.00CH37063). Vol.2 (pp.636–640).https://doi.org/10.1109/FUZZY.2000.839067Santos, J. B., & Irizo, F. J. O. (2005). Modelling citation age data with right censoring. Scientometrics, 62(3), 329-342. doi:10.1007/s11192-005-0025-5Scimago Journal & Country Rank. (n.d.). Retrieved fromhttp://www.scimagojr.com/Singer, J. D., & Willett, J. B. (1993). It’s About Time: Using Discrete-Time Survival Analysis to Study Duration and the Timing of Events. Journal of Educational Statistics, 18(2), 155-195. doi:10.3102/10769986018002155Su, H.-N., & Lee, P.-C. (2010). Mapping knowledge structure by keyword co-occurrence: a first look at journal papers in Technology Foresight. Scientometrics, 85(1), 65-79. doi:10.1007/s11192-010-0259-8SUN, J. (1997). REGRESSION ANALYSIS OF INTERVAL-CENSORED FAILURE TIME DATA. Statistics in Medicine, 16(5), 497-504. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19970315)16:53.0.co;2-jTang, R. (2005). Evolution of the interdisciplinary characteristics of information and library science. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 41(1), 54-63. doi:10.1002/meet.1450410107Tuomaala, O., Järvelin, K., & 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. doi:10.1002/asi.23034Uddin, S., & Khan, A. (2016). The impact of author-selected keywords on citation counts. Journal of Informetrics, 10(4), 1166-1177. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2016.10.004Vakkari, P. (1994). Library and Information Science: Its Content and Scope. Advances in Librarianship, 1-55. doi:10.1108/s0065-2830(1994)0000018003Walters, W. H., & Wilder, E. I. (2015). Disciplinary, national, and departmental contributions to the literature of library and information science, 2007-2012. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(6), 1487-1506. doi:10.1002/asi.23448Wang, M., & Chai, L. (2018). Three new bibliometric indicators/approaches derived from keyword analysis. Scientometrics, 116(2), 721-750. doi:10.1007/s11192-018-2768-9Wang, Z.-Y., Li, G., Li, C.-Y., & Li, A. (2011). Research on the semantic-based co-word analysis. Scientometrics, 90(3), 855-875. doi:10.1007/s11192-011-0563-yXu, J., Bu, Y., Ding, Y., Yang, S., Zhang, H., Yu, C., & Sun, L. (2018). Understanding the formation of interdisciplinary research from the perspective of keyword evolution: a case study on joint attention. Scientometrics, 117(2), 973-995. doi:10.1007/s11192-018-2897-1Yang, S., Han, R., Wolfram, D., & Zhao, Y. (2016). Visualizing the intellectual structure of information science (2006–2015): Introducing author keyword coupling analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 10(1), 132-150. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2015.12.003Zhang, J., Yu, Q., Zheng, F., Long, C., Lu, Z., & Duan, Z. (2015). Comparing keywords plus of WOS and author keywords: A case study of patient adherence research. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(4), 967-972. doi:10.1002/asi.2343