Authorship and Co-Authorship Structure of Knowledge and Information Science: Status of Presence and Influence outside the Borders

Document Type : Original Article


1 Associate Professor of Knowledge and Information Science, Faculty of Social Sciences, Razi University, , Iran. E-mail:

2 Associate Professor of Knowledge and Information Science, Faculty of Education & Psycology, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran. E-mail:

3 Ph.D in Knowledge and Information science, Shahid Chamran Universuty of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran. E-mail:


Purpose: This research investigates the structure of Library and Information science based on indicators of authorship, co-authorship, and scientific influence model.
Methodology: As practical research, based on scientometric and social networks analysis, the records have been retrieved from WOS by the selection of 35 journals from 1970 to 2016. The Citespace, visualization analysis tool, was used to accomplish co-authorship, UCINET for centrality metrics, and Bibexcel for the H-index family.
Findings: An exact study of the number of authors in each article indicates that the dominant authorship pattern of Iran Knowledge and Information science is a two-author pattern. In this regard, the three-author approach is in second place with a frequency of 25%.
The results of the study also showed the Jamali, with 25 articles and Kousha with 481 citations, respectively, have been awarded the title of the most productive and most cited authors among the authors of Iran Knowledge and Information science. The medal of the largest share of the cooperation among institutes and universities was awarded to Islamic Azad University.
Other results of co-authorship analysis of Iran Knowledge and Information Science showed that the collaboration of Jamali and Nicholas in the field of information-seeking behavior on the one hand, and Kousha and Thelwall collaboration in the field of science measurement studies (especially webometrics) on the other hand, are new trends.
On the other hand, considering the bursting of the occurrence of the Jamali and Nicholas in the co-authorship network of Iran Knowledge and Information Science, these two authors should be regarded as a kind of creators of an emerging trend in Iran Knowledge and Information Science.
Finally, the findings showed that almost half of the articles in the Iran Knowledge and Information Science (46.3%) had been prepared with the collaboration of authors from other countries. Iranian researchers have collaborated mostly with Asian countries. They have collaborated mostly with Malaysian researchers and, the second place with 14 frequencies is allocated to Australian researchers.
Conclusion: The existence of a significant relationship between the two indicators of productivity and effect showed that the authors of Iran Knowledge and Information Science, while paying attention to the increase in the number of articles and their level of productivity, have also noted the quality of the articles.
The results showed that merely receiving more citations, or increasing the level of scientific participation of a researcher, is not a sufficient condition for macro-scientific decision-making and policy-making, and the use of qualitative indicators and methods to validate the results of scientometric research in this regard seems necessary.
Other results also showed that the increasing interest of Iranian researchers in collaborating with other authors in the production of joint scientific articles, has played a significant role in increasing visibility and receiving more citations over time.


حریری، نجلا؛ نیکزاد، مهسا (1390). شبکه­های هم‌نویسندگی در مقاله‌های ایرانی رشته­های کتابداری و اطلاع‌رسانی، روان‌شناسی، مدیریت و اقتصاد در پایگاه ISI بین سال­های 2000 تا 2009. پژوهشنامه پردازش و مدیریت اطلاعات، 26(4)، 825-844.
حسن­زاده، محمد؛ خدادوست، رضا؛ زندیان، فاطمه (1391). بررسی شاخص­های هم­تألیفی، مرکزیت و چاله­های ساختاری پژوهشگران نانو فناوری ایران نمایه شده در نمایه استنادی علوم (1991-2011). پژوهشنامه پردازش و مدیریت اطلاعات، 28(1)، 223 -250.
خاصه، علی اکبر (1394). ساختار دانش در حوزه مطالعات سنجشی: مطالعه هم‌استنادی، هم‌نویسندگی، و هم‌واژگانی تولیدات علمی بر اساس رویکردهای تحلیل شبکه و دیداری‌سازی علم. (رساله­ دکتری علم اطلاعات و دانش­شناسی). دانشگاه پیام نور، مشهد.
زوارقی، رسول؛ فدایی، غلامرضا (1393). نگاشت ساختار فکری حوزه موضوعی ترمودینامیک بر اساس بروندادهای علمی ایرانیان در وبگاه علوم مؤسسه تامسون رویترز. تحقیقات کتابداری و اطلاع­رسانی دانشگاهی، 48(1)، 1-38.
سهیلی، فرامرز؛ شریف مقدم، هادی؛ موسوی چلک، افشین؛ خاصه، علی اکبر (1394). تأثیرگذارترین پژوهشگران در حوزه­ آی متریکس: نگاهی ترکیبی به شاخص­های تأثیرگذاری، تحقیقات کتابداری و اطلاع رسانی دانشگاهی، 49(1)، 23-54.
سهیلی، فرامرز (۱۳۹۱). تحلیل ساختار شبکههای اجتماعی هم‌نویسندگی بروندادهای علمی پژوهشگران علم اطلاعات به منظور شناسائی و سنجش روابط، تعاملات و راهبردهای هم‌نویسندگی در این حوزه. (رساله دکتری)، دانشگاه شهید چمران اهواز، گروه کتابداری و اطلاع‌رسانی.
سهیلی، فرامرز؛ عصاره، فریده (1392). بررسی تراکم و اندازه شبکه اجتماعی موجود در شبکه هم‌نویسندگی مجلات علم اطلاعات. پژوهشنامه پردازش و مدیریت اطلاعات، 29(2)، 351-372.
سهیلی، فرامرز؛ عصاره، فریده؛ فرج‌پهلو، عبدالحسین (1392). بررسی تأثیر راهبرهای هم‌نویسندگی بر بهره‌وری پژوهشگران علم اطلاعات، کتابداری و اطلاع‌رسانی، 16(1)، 189-208.
عرفان­منش، محمد امین؛ بصیریان جهرمی، رضا (1392). شبکه هم­تألیفی مقالات منتشرشده درفصلنامه مطالعات ملی کتابداری و سازماندهی اطلاعات با استفاده از شاخص­های تحلیل شبکه­های اجتماعی. فصلنامه مطالعات ملی کتابداری و سازماندهی اطلاعات، 24(2)، 76-96.
عرفان­منش، محمدامین؛ ارشدی، هما (1394). شبکه هم‌نویسندگی مؤسسات در مقاله‌های علم اطلاعات و دانش‌شناسی ایران، تحقیقات کتابداری و اطلاع رسانی، 49(1)، 79-99.
عصاره، فریده؛ سهیلی، فرامرز؛ فرج پهلو، عبدالحسین؛ معرف زاده، عبدالحمید (139۱). بررسی سنجه مرکزیت در شبکه هم‌نویسندگی مقالات مجلات علم اطلاعات. پژوهش‏نامه کتابداری و اطلاع‏رسانی، ۲(2)، 181-200.
عصاره، فریده؛ سهیلی، فرامرز؛ منصوری، علی (1393). علم سنجی و دیداری سازی اطلاعات. اصفهان: دانشگاه اصفهان.
منصوریان، یزدان (1389). پنجاه محور پژوهشی در مطالعات علم سنجی. کتاب ماه کلیات (مهر)، 64-71.
Callon, M., Courtial, J.P., & Laville, F. (1991). Co-word analysis as a tool for describing the network of interactions between basic and technological research: The case of polymer chemsitry. Scientometrics, 22(1), 155-205.
Chen, C., Ibekwe-SanJuan, F.,&  Hou, J. (2010b).The structure and dynamics of cocitation clusters: A multiple-perspective cocitation analysis.Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 61(7), 1386-1409.
Chen, C. (2004). Searching for intellectual turning points: Progressive knowledge domain visualization. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA (PNAS), 101, 5303-5310.
Chen, C. (2006). CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57, 359-369
Cuellar, M. J., Vidgen, R., Takeda, H., & Truex, D. (2016). Ideational influence, connectedness, and venue representation: Making an assessment of scholarly capital. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 17(1), 1.
Egghe, L. (2005). Power laws in the information production process: Lotkaian informetrics. Oxford (UK): Elsevier.
Erfanmanesh, M., & Arshadi, H. (2015). Co-authorship Network of Institutions in Iranian Knowledge and Information Science Papers. Journal of Academic librarianship and Information Research, 49(1), 79-99. (in Persian)
Erfanmanesh, M., & Basirian Jahromi, R. (2013). The Co-authorship Network of the Articles Published in the National Studies on Librarianship and Information Organization Journal Using Social Networks Analysis Indexes. National Studies on Librarianship and Information Organization, 24(2), 76-96. (in Persian).
Erfanmanesh, M., Rohani, V. A., & Abrizah, A. (2012). Co-authorship network of scientometrics research collaboration. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science, 17(3), 73-93.
Faramarz S., & Osareh, F. (2014). A Survey on Density and Size of Co-authorship Networks in Information Science Journals. Iranian Journal of Information Processing and Management, 29(2), 351-372. URL: (in Persian)
Freeman, L. C. (1979). Centrality in social networks: 1. conceptual clarification. Social Networks, 1(3), 215-239.
Hariri, N., & Nikzad, M. (2011). Co-authorship networks of Iranian articles in library and information science, psychology, management and economics in ISI during 2000-2009. Iranian Journal of Information Processing and Management, 26(4), 825-844. URL: (in Persian)
Hart, R. L. (2000). Co-authorship in the academic library literature: A survey of attitudes and behaviors. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 26(5), 339–345.
Hassanzadeh, M., Khodadust, R., & Zandian, F. (2012). Analysis of Co-Authorship Indicators, Betweenness Centrality and Structural Holes of the Iranian Nanotechnology Researchers in Science Citation Index (1991-2011). Iranian Journal of Information Processing and Management, 28(1), 223-249. URL: (in Persian).
He, Y., & Hui, S. C. (2002). Mining a web citation database for author co-citation analysis. Information processing & management, 38(4), 491-508.
Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(46), 16569-16572.
Huang, M. H., & Chang, Y. W. (2011). A study of interdisciplinarity in information science: using direct citation and co-authorship analysis. Journal of Information Science, 37(4), 369-378.
Khasseh, A. A. (2015). Knowledge Structure in Mesusurement, Co-Citation and Co-word analysis based on Network analysis and knowledge visualization approaches (Knowlkedge and Information Science, PhD. Thesis). Payam-Nour University, Mashhad
Liu, P., Wu, Q., Mu, X., Yu, K., & Guo, Y. (2015). Detecting the intellectual structure of library and information science based on formal concept analysis. Scientometrics, 104, 737–762.
Mansourian, Y. (2010). 50 research axis in scientometric studies. Kollaiat Book Monthly (7), 64-71 (in Persian)
McCain, K. W. (1986). Cocited Author Mapping as a Valid Representation of Intellectual Structure. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 37(3), 111-122.
Osareh, F., Soheili, F., Farajpahlo, A., & Moarefzadeh, A. (2013). A survay on centrality measure in co-authorship networks in information science journals. Library and Information Science Research (LISRJ), 2(2). (in Persian)
Osareh, F., Sohaili, F., & Mansouri, A. (2014). Scientometrics and Information Visualization. Isfahan: Isfahan University.
Sohaili, F. (2012). Analyzing the structure of co-authorship social network of Information science researcgers outputs to identify and measurement rekationships, interactions and strategies of field co-authoship, PhD Thesis. Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz. Library and Information Science Departmrent.
Sohaili, F., Osareh, F., & farajpahlou, A. (2013). Investigating the impact of co-authorship on Information science researcher’s productivity, Library and Information Science, 16(1), 189-208. (in Persian).
Soheili, F., Sharif Moghaddam, H., Mousavi Chelak, A., Khasseh, A. (2015). The Most Influential Researchers in iMetrics: A Compound Look at Influence Indicators. Journal of Academic librarianship and Information Research, 49(1), 23-54. (in Persian).
Truex, D. P., Cuellar, M. J., & Takeda, H. (2009). Assessing scholarly influence: Using the Hirsch indices to reframe the discourse. Journal of the Association of Information Systems, 10(7), 560-594.
Truex, D. P., Cuellar, M. J., Takeda, H., & Vidgen, R. (2011). The Scholarly influence of Heinz Klein: Ideational and social measures of his impact on IS research and IS scholars. European Journal of Information Systems, 20(4), 422-439.
Zavaraqi, R., & Fadaie, G. (2014). Visualizing the scientific network of thermodynamics subject area based on outputs of Iranians scholars of the field indexed in Thomson Reuters Web of Science. Journal of Academic librarianship and Information Research, 48(1), 1-38. (in Persian).
Zavaraqi, R., & Fadaie, G. R. (2012). Scientometrics or science of science: quantitative, qualitative or mixed one. Collnet Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management, 6(2), 273-278.