Finding our foundation: Analysis of the LISA database for research retrievability

Perryman, Carol and Lu, Dihui Finding our foundation: Analysis of the LISA database for research retrievability., 2006 [Preprint]


Download (197kB) | Preview

English abstract

Objective: The primary objective of this study is to examine the Library and Information Science Abstracts (LISA) database to determine if research literature can consistently be retrieved by using keywords identifying the research methodologies used. Question: For the journals named, are articles identified as ‘research’ able to be consistently retrieved by using keywords related to research methodology? Methods: Citations from the top 10 Library and Information Science journals for 2001 as identified by Koufogiannakis, Slater & Crumley (2004) were obtained, then a filter developed by Catherine Beverley (2004) was used independently to identify research articles. The resulting sets of citations were compared, then the two datasets were analyzed in order to consider retrievability and fit for assigned keywords from the LISA database. Results: Although it would need to be tested against a random set of citations rather than the purposive sample tested here, our analysis suggests that retrieval using the descriptor terms alone may succeed in only 31.5% ± 5.2% of attempts, with a 95% confidence interval. Conclusions: The LISA thesaurus is not consistent or sufficiently comprehensive to serve the needs of researchers. Recommendations for the improved retrievability of LIS research literature from the database are made.

Item type: Preprint
Keywords: librarians, research, evidence-based library and information practice
Subjects: A. Theoretical and general aspects of libraries and information. > AA. Library and information science as a field.
H. Information sources, supports, channels. > HL. Databases and database Networking.
H. Information sources, supports, channels.
Depositing user: Carol Perryman
Date deposited: 25 Feb 2009
Last modified: 02 Oct 2014 12:13


1. Beverley, C. (2004). Searching the library and information science literature. In Booth, A., & Brice, A. (Eds.), Evidence-based practice for information professionals: A handbook (pp.89-103). London: Facet Publications.

2. Booth, A., & Brice, A. (Eds.). (2004). Evidence-based practice for information

professionals: A handbook. London: Facet Publications, 2004.

3. Burdick, A.J., Doms, C.A., Doty, C.C., & Kinzie, L.A. (1990, October). Research activities among health sciences librarians: A survey. Bulletin of the Medical Library Associaton, 78, 400–402.

4. Crumley, E., & Koufogiannakis, D. (2002). Developing evidence-based librarianship:

Practical steps for implementation. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 19, 61-70.

5. Dalrymple, P.W., & Fenske, R.E. (1992, October). Factors influencing research productivity among health sciences librarians. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, 80, 353-360.

6. Eldredge, J. (2004). How good is the evidence base? In Booth, A., & Brice, A. (Eds.),

Evidence-based practice for information professionals: A handbook (pp.36-37). London:

Facet Publications.

7. Hood, W., & Wilson, C.S. (1994). Indexing terms in the LISA database on CD-Rom.

Information Processing & Management, 30, 327-342.

8. Jacsó, P. (1992). CD-ROM Software, dataware, and hardware: Evaluation, selection, and installation. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.

9. Jacsó, P. (1997). Content evaluation of databases. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 32, 231-267.

10. Jacsó, P. (2001). Content evaluation of textual CD-Rom and web databases.Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.

11. Koufogiannakis, D., Slater, L., & Crumley, E. (2004). A content analysis of librarianship research. Journal of Information Science, 30, 227-239.

12. Moore, N.L. (1988, April). LISA indexing: Economic aspects of controlled indexing.

Indexer, 16, 11-16.

13. Oliver, S. (2000, March). Revolutionizing how we generate new knowledge: A challenge for librarians, health professionals, service users and researchers. Health Libraries Review, 17, 22-5.

14. Peritz, B.C. (1980, Fall). The methods of library science research: Some results from a bibliometric survey. Library Research, 2, 251-68.

15. Poole, C.E. (2000, September). Importance of research and publication by community

college librarians. College & Research Libraries, 61, 486-9.

16. Powell, R.R., Baker, L.M., & Mika, J.J. (2002). Library and information science practitioners and research. Library & Information Science Research, 24, 49-72.

17. Read, E.J., & Smith, R.C. (2000). Searching for library and information science literature: A comparison of coverage in three databases. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, 19,118-27.

18. Stieg, M.F., & Atkinson, J.L. (1988, October). Librarianship online: Old problems, no new solutions. Library Journal, 113, 48-59.

19. Watson-Boone, R. (2000, March). Academic librarians as practitioner-researchers. Journal ofAcademic Librarianship, 26, 85-93.

20. Weaver, C.G. (1985, April). Writing for publication: Barriers and bridges. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, 73, 213-4.

21. White, G. (2001). The professional development of reference librarians: Implications of research, publication, and service. Reference Librarian, 35, 337-350.

22. Williams, J.F., & Winston, M.D. (2003). Leadership competencies and the importance of research methods and statistical analysis in decision-making and research and publication: A study of citation patterns. Library & Information Science Research, 25, 387-402.

23. Zweizig, D.L. (1999). Support to librarians in their research roles. Library Quarterly, 69, 363-366.


Downloads per month over past year

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item