Miscellaneous. The categories representing departments of authors of library and information science journals included Business, Computer Science, Geography, Institute, Library and Information Science, and Management.
The Research Methodologies used in this study were Descriptive (quan- titative), Inferential (quantitative), Qualitative, or No Research Methodology.
Each article in the journals for 2,000 was examined for the research meth- odologies employed. Initially, the qualitative category specified the particular type of qualitative analysis in each article, such as Biography, Phenomenol- ogy, Grounded Theory, Ethnography, and Case Study. When there was not enough data for individual categories for qualitative analysis, the individual categories for qualitative analysis were collapsed into one category, qualita- tive analysis. The other three quantitative research categories tabulated in- cluded descriptive and inferential and were not collapsed into one category.
rejection of the null hypothesis. 62.5% of the articles using inferential statistics had male authors and 37.5% of the inferential articles had female authors.
Research Methodologies Used in Eight Library and Information Science Core Journals for 2000
In a frequency tabulation for the eight core journals in library and infor- mation, it was discovered that a total of 34.69% of the journals contained both Descriptive and Inferential statistics; while 60.63% of the journals contained No Research Methodologies (or statistical measures). Six of the eight journals in the Information and Library Science list were information science journals. Few of the studies published in information science em- ployed traditional statistical measures, but used models and formulas to discover methods of information management and retrieval to develop web- based interfaces. Primarily, these studies are doing research, but not of the type measured in this study.
For a cross tabulation using research methodologies and gender, it was discovered that of the publications employing inferential statistics, 81.05%
of them were published by males; while 18.95% were published by females.
Males did not use any statistical analysis 63.66% of the time, while females did not use any analysis 49.69% of the time.
Overall, only 34.69% of the eight library and information science journals published in 2000 contained some form of descriptive and inferential sta- tistics, assuming that over 60% of the journals lacked any form of quan- tifiable statistics. Without continued statistical analysis in a literature, it is difficult to develop a theoretical base. In contrast, given the fact that the journals cited the most in library and information science are information science journals, one must seriously examine why information science jour- nals are being cited more than library science journals.
Has library science become a subdiscipline of information science, or are they now becoming more distinct, separate disciplines? A more accurate portrayal of the two disciplines may warrant separate categories in tabu- lating citation ranks, one for information science and the other for library science. A change has occurred from this author’s research in 1989 of twenty-five core journals in library and information science for 1985 (Enger et al., 1989) to the present 2000 study. The most cited journals were pri- marily library science journals, and reflected the discipline of library science.
In this study, a distinction between the two has become apparent, ques- tioning whether they are becoming two distinct, separate disciplines.
Gender of the Authors
Comparing males publishing in higher education to library and information science, 56.2% in higher education were male; while 70.73% of the authors were male in library and information science. The total female authors for both disciplines were 327, while the total male authors for both disciplines were 602. When counting (or describing) only the number of authors by discipline, 29.27% of the authors in library and information were female while 70.73% were male. It appears that males publish a much higher per- centage of the articles in library science than in higher education.
Carnegie Classification of the Authors
There were a total of 930 authors between the two disciplines represented in this study. Of the 930 authors, 489 (or 53%) worked at Carnegie Extensive institutions for the year 2000, representing more than half of all the insti- tutions in the Carnegie list. In addition, 245 authors were from institutions outside of the United States, or international authors. Of the 489 authors from Carnegie Extensive institutions, 220 were published in the higher ed- ucation literature and 281 were published in the library and information science literature. In other words, for higher education, 57.94% of all Car- negie Categories were represented in the Extensive category and 15.60 in the International category. For library and information science, 49.21% rep- resented the Extensive category, while 33.10% represented the International category (the two largest representations in both disciplines) All other Car- negie areas represented the remaining categories. In performing the chi- square test on higher education and library and information science, there was a significant difference in representation of authors by Carnegie Clas- sification with a probability ofp¼.0095. The difference may be explained that when cross tabulation occurred, the distribution between both Exten- sive and Other classifications appeared to be similar, or nearly equal.
When cross tabulating for gender and Carnegie Classification for higher education, 40.58% of the authors from Extensive institutions were female while 59.42% were male. In library and information science, 34.30% of the authors from Carnegie Extensive institutions were female while 65.70%
representing Carnegie Extensive institutions were male. A disparity exists in each discipline among sexes regarding who is represented by the highest tiered institutions. It also exists in authors represented by the highest tiered institutions, overall.
Position of the Authors
On a frequency rating, faculty published the most articles in higher edu- cation, with 61.71% of authorship; administrators published 22%, while students published 10.57% of the articles. For library and information sci- ence, the findings were similar. Faculty published 64.34% of the articles, academic librarians 12.94%, Researchers 10.49%, and Students 5.24% of the articles. The departments represented in higher education were Other (48.80%) (meaning departments other than those listed here), Higher Ed- ucation (20.64%) (meaning people representing departments of higher ed- ucation), Education (17.86%) and Psychology (12.80%). The departments represented in the library and information literature were very diverse, with 97 departments represented and listed in order with the highest first: Com- puter Science (10.70%), Business (10.08%), Institutes (10.08%), Geography (6.58%), Library and Information Science (7%), Management (4.73%), Management Information Systems (2.88%). All of the other percentages were too low to discuss here.
In regard to gender of the authors, the most significant difference was noted in the library and information science literature where Academic Li- brarians who were female represented authorship in 63.01% of the publi- cations, while male academic librarians represented 36.99%. The reverse is true for faculty – 75.99% of the faculty publishing in library and informa- tion are male, while 24.01% of the faculty are female.
In both areas, faculty publish the most and are widely represented from areas other than higher education and library and information science.
Content Analysis
The area discussed the most in the higher education literature was College Students (34.21%), College Administration (16.67%), College Faculty (16.23%), and Institutional Evaluation and Research (10.96%). In library and information science, 210 content areas were tabulated on the basis of keywords. The following topics were discussed, with the highest listed first:
Geographical Information Systems (4.39%); the World Wide Web (2.82%);
Relevance (1.88%); a tie ensued for the following (1.57%): Collection De- velopment, End User Searching, Information Retrieval Systems, Librarians, Service, Online Searching. The literature of higher education is tied to the operation of the academy, while it appears that the literature of library and information science is tied to information/technological access and service.