Objective. The second part “Conference time in the library and information sciences” of the study is aimed at conducting a bibliometric analysis of the publication activity and citation of the authors presenting their papers at international conferences indexed in Scopus and/or Web of Science (CC). Methods. Bibliometric analysis of publications that are Conference proceeding (“proceedings paper” and/or “conference paper”) was carried out using the Scopus and Web of Science (CC) citation databases. Using a comparative analysis, the obtained data, covering the “conference paper”/“proceedings paper” publication type for all years of their reflection in each of the databases, as well as in chronological frames from 2016 to 01.06.2020 were studied. Results. Analysis of the publication activity of LIS university (academic) researchers shows that Scopus (n=4561) contains more documents than WoS database (n=4145). The growth of Open Access (OA) documents in both databases is significant since 2000. But the period 2016-01.06.2020 demonstrates a slight dominance of the number of OA publications in Scopus (n=192) compared to WoS (n=185). Distribution data by authors, universities, countries, knowledge areas were also obtained. Citation analysis shows poor results on both bases, which may be due to the focus of conferences on rapidly changing topics. Conclusions. Showing the relatively low LIS coverage in university research, as well as low citation rates, this paper demonstrates that LIS researchers/practitioners need to create more quality publications to be recognized as an important area. The author hopes that this work will generate great research interest in the field of LIS and understanding the great value of Conference proceeding as a publication containing original/primary research results.


library and information science; conference; conference proceeding; proceedings paper; conference paper; university library; publication activity; bibliometric analysis; citation

Full Text:



Agarwal, N. K., & Islam, M. A. (2018). Ascertaining the place of Library & Information Science in Knowledge Management research. Proceedings of the 81st Annual Meeting of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Vancouver, Canada, November, 55(1), 9-14, 2018. (in English)

Ahmad, K., JianMing, Z., & Rafi, M. (2019). Assessing the literature of knowledge management (KM) in the field of library and information science. Information Discovery and Delivery, 47(1), 35-41. doi: (in English)

Anwar, M. A., & Saeed, H. (1999). Pakistani librarians as authors: a bibliometric study of citations in LISA‐PLUS. Asian Libraries, 8(2), 39-46. doi: (in English)

Borrego, Á., Ardanuy, J., & Urbano, C. (2018). Librarians as Research Partners: Their Contribution to the Scholarly Endeavour Beyond. Library and Information Science, 44(5), 663-670. doi: (in English)

Borrego, Á., & Pinfield, S. (2020). Librarians publishing in partnership with other researchers: Roles, motivations, benefits, and challenges. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 20(4). 655-675. doi: (in English)

Dash, N. K., Sahoo, J., & Mohanty, B. (2015). Evolution of Library Assessment Literature – A Bibliometric Analysis of LAC Proceedings. Innovative Librarianship: Adapting to Digital Realitiesin Proceedings of 10th International CALIBER – 2015, March 12-14, HP University, IIAS, Shimla and INFLIBNET Centre, Himachal Pradesh, India, 91-106. Retrieved from (in English)

De Sutter, B., & Van Den Oord, A. (2012). To be or not to be cited in computer science. Communcations of the ACM, 55(8), 6975. doi: (in English)

González-Albo, B., & Bordons, M. (2011). Articles vs. proceedings papers: Do they differ in research relevance and impact? A case study in the Library and Information Science field. Journal of Informetrics, 5(3), 369-381. doi: (in English)

Erfanmanesh, M. A., Didegah, F., & Omidvar, S. (2010). Research productivity and impact of library and information science in the Web of Science. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science, 15(3), 85-95. Retrieved from (in English)

IOPScience. (2020). Proceedings policy on Impact Factors. Retrieved from (in English)

Jabeen, M., Yun, L., Rafiq, M., & Jabeen, M. (2015). Research productivity of library scholars: bibliometric analysis of growth and trends of LIS publications”. New Library World, 116(7-8), 433-454. doi: (in English)

Jokić, M (2020). Productivity, visibility, authorship, and collaboration in library and information science journals: Central and Eastern European authors. Scientometrics, 122(2), 1189-1219. doi: (in English)

Kolesnykova, T., Matveyeva, O., Manashkin, L., & Mìshchenko, M. (2019). Railway transportation of dangerous goods: a bibliometric aspect. MATEC Web of Conferences, 294, 03014. EOT-2019. doi: (in English)

Kolesnykova, T. O., Pominova, O. V., & Kolesnykov, S. R. (2016). Obtaining of new knowledge in concerning «air conditioning» at the railway transport: scientometric aspect. Science and Transport Progress, 3(63), 7-19. doi: (in Ukranian)

Lisée, C., Larivière, V., & Archambault, E. (2008). Conference proceedings as a source of scientific information: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(11), 1776-1784. Retrieved from (in English)


  • There are currently no refbacks.