• Mads Breum
  • Kasper Bruun
6. sem, Bachelor i Biblioteks- og informationsvidenskab
In this paper we look at the established practise of using only one operationalization of a subject area when collecting data intended for bibliometric analysis. Using the method Åström utilized in his 2007 Article “Changes in the LIS research front” and by operationalizing LIS in two other distinct ways, our aim was to characterize resulting changes, if any, when the resulting data was used as basis for four common bibliometric analyses. These were the Lotka, Bradford, co-citation, and co-author analysis, two publication analysis and two citation analyses. The results were that of the four, only one remained largely unaffected by the difference in operationalization. The implications of this are discussed and we propose a series of important considerations that has to be taken into account when collecting empirical data for these kinds of analysis. Our findings also implies that a revision of established practice should be undertaken with the twin purposes of making bibliometric tools like citation analysis and publication analysis more powerful as well as making bibliometry an essential tool in the domain analysis approach.
Udgivelsesdato27 maj 2013
Antal sider40
Udgivende institutionDet Informationsvidenskabelige Akademi - København


  • Bibliometri, Publikationsanalyse, Citationsanalyse, Operationalisering, Bibliometriske kort