This study provides an historical analysis of the discipline of information retrieval (IR) for three time periods: 1980—1984, 1990—1994 and 2000—2004. This analysis is done through the use of a novel bibliometric technique called tri-occurrence analysis, in which the descriptor ‘information retrieval’ is used as a filter term within the traditional technique of co-occurrence analysis. The resulting data is visualized by means of Pathfinder Network analysis. The findings provide evidence of an evolution in the IR landscape over the three decades from an emphasis on systems-, storage- and education-related research in the 1980s to database-, user interface- and information service-related research in the 1990s and to web-related research in the 2000s. This work provides additional validation of the use of tri-occurrence analysis as a useful bibliometric technique.
P.A. Savage-Knepshield and N.J. Belkin, Interaction in information retrieval: trends over time, Journal of the American Society for Information Science50(12) (1999) 1067-1082.
2.
S.E. Robertson , On the history of evaluation in IR, Journal of Information Science34(4) (2008) 439-456.
3.
M. Lesk, The seven ages of information retrieval, UDT Occassional Paper #5: International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (1995). Available at: http://www.ifla.org/VI/5/op/udtop5/udtop5.htm (accessed 10 May 2008).
4.
S. Mizzaro, Relevance: the whole history, Journal of the American Society for Information Science48(9) (1997) 810-832.
5.
K. Markey, Twenty-five years of end-user searching, part 1: research findings, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology58(8) (2007) 1071-1081.
6.
K. Markey , Twenty-five years of end-user searching, part 2: future research and directions, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology58(8) (2007) 1123-1130.
7.
T.B. Hahn , Pioneers of the online age, Information Processing and Management32(1) (1996) 33-48.
8.
A.F. Smeaton , G. Keogh, C. Gurrin, K. McDonald and T. Sødring, Analysis of papers from twenty-five years of SIGIR conferences: what have we been doing for the last quarter of a century? ACM SIGIR Forum37(1) (2003) 49-53.
9.
P. Enser, The evolution of visual information retrieval, Journal of Information Science34(4) (2008) 531-546.
10.
I. Ruthven , Interactive information retrieval. In: B. Cronin (ed.), Annual Review of Information Science and Technology42(1) (2008) 43-91.
11.
C.P. Bourne and T.B. Hahn, A History of Online Information Services (MIT Press, Cambridge, 2003).
12.
M.E.D. Koenig , How close we came, Information Processing and Management28(3) (1992) 433-436.
13.
M.F. Lynch and P. Willett, Information retrieval research in the Department of Information Studies, University of Sheffield: 1965-1985, Journal of Information Science13(4) (1987) 221-234.
14.
K. Spark Jones , Information Retrieval Experiment ( Butterworths, London, 1981).
15.
K. Spark Jones and P. Willett, Readings in Information Retrieval ( Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Amsterdam, 1997).
16.
J. Rowley , The controlled versus natural indexing languages debate revisited: a perspective on information retrieval practice and research , Journal of Information Science20(2) (1994) 108-118.
17.
D.K. Harman and E.M. Voorhees, TREC: An overview. In: B. Cronin (ed.), Annual Review of Information Science and Technology40(1) (2008) 113-155.
18.
Y. Ding, S. Foo and G.G. Chowdhury, A bibliometric analysis of collaboration in the field of information retrieval , International Information and Library Review30 (1999) 367-376.
19.
Y. Ding, G.G. Chowdhury and S. Foo, Mapping the intellectual structure of information retrieval studies: An author co-citation analysis, 1987-1997, Journal of Information Science25(1) ( 1999) 67-78.
20.
Y. Ding, G.G. Chowdhury and S. Foo, Journal as markers of intellectual space: Journal co-citation analysis of information retrieval area, 1987-1997, Scientometrics47(1) (2000) 55-73.
21.
Y. Ding, G.G. Chowdhury and S. Foo, Bibliometric cartography of information retrieval research by using co-word analysis, Information Processing & Management37(6) (2001) 817-842.
22.
N. Kando , M. Nozue, T. Harita, T. Murakami, M. Yatsu and S. Ueda, Structure of information-retrieval research: Tracking the specialties and development of research using cocitation maps and citation diagrams. Library and Information Science29 (1991) 29-65.
23.
T.A. Morris, Structural relationships within medical informatics: A classification/indexing co-occurrence analysis (Doctoral dissertation, Drexel, 2001).
24.
H.G. Small , Cocitation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents, Journal of the American Society for Information Science24(4) (1973) 265-269.
25.
H.D. White and B.C. Griffith, A cocitation map of authors in judgement and decision research. In: B.F. Anderson, D.H. Deane , K.R. Hammond, G.H. McClellan, and J.C. Shanteau (eds), Concepts in Judgement and Decision Research: Definitions, Sources, Interrelations, Comments (Praeger, New York, 1981) 261-271.
26.
H.D. White and B.C. Griffith, Author cocitation: a literature measure of intellectual structure, Journal of the American Society for Information Science32 (1981 ) 163-171.
27.
H.D. White , Cocited author retrieval online: An experiment with the social indicators literature, Journal of the American Society for Information Science32 ( 1981) 16-21.
28.
H.G. Small , Cited documents as concept symbols, Social Studies of Science8 (1974 ) 327-340.
29.
J. Whittaker , Creativity and conformity in science: Titles, keywords and co-word analysis, Social Studies of Science19 (1989) 473-496.
30.
K.W. McCain , Evaluating cocited author search performance in a collaborative specialty, Journal of the American Society for Information Science39(6) (1988) 428-431.
31.
K.W. McCain , Descriptor and citation retrieval in the medical behavioural sciences literature: Retrieval overlaps and novelty distribution , Journal of the American Society for Information Science40(2) ( 1989) 433-443.
32.
M.L. Pao , Comparing retrieval by keywords and citations . In: Proceedings of the National Online Meeting ( Learned Information, NJ, 1986) 341-346.
33.
H.D. White, Cocited author retrieval, Information Technology and Libraries5(2) ( 1986) 93-99.
34.
M. Callon, J.P. Courtial, W.A. Turner and S. Bauin, From translations to problematic networks: An introduction to co-word analysis , Social Science Information22(2) (1983) 191-235.
35.
L. Leydesdorff and R. Zaal, Co-words and citations relations between document sets and environments. In: L. Egghe and R. Rousseau (eds), Informetrics 87/88: Select Proceedings of the First International Conference on Bibliometrics and Theoretical Aspects of Information Retrieval, Diepenbeek, Belgium, August 25-28 (Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, 1988) 105-119.
36.
P. Healey , H. Rothman and P.K. Hock, An experiment in science mapping for research planning, Research Policy15 (1986) 233-251.
37.
H.G. Small , Multiple citation patterns in scientific literature: The circle and hill models, Information Storage and Retrieval10(11-12) (1974) 393-402.
38.
L.S. Marion , A tri-citation analysis exploring the citation image of Kurt Lewin. In: Proceedings of the ASIS&T Annual Meeting39 (2002) 3-13.
39.
L.S. Marion, Of tribes and totems: An author cocitation context analysis of Kurt Lewin’s influence in social science journals (Doctoral dissertation , Drexel, 2004).
40.
K.W. McCain , Using tricitation to dissect the citation image: Conrad Hal Waddington and the rise of evolutionary developmental biology, Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology60(7) (2009) 1301-1319.
41.
K.W. McCain , Gene’s worlds: Comparing Eugene Garfield’s co-citation and tri-citation image PFNets over time. In: Proceedings of the 2008 ASIS&T Annual Meeting (Columbus, OH , 2008).
42.
L.S. Marion and K.W. McCain , Contrasting views of software engineering journals: Author cocitation choices and indexer vocabulary assignments. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology52(4) (2001) 297-308.
43.
F. Hjortgaard Christensen and P. Ingwersen, Online citation analysis. Scientometrics37(1) (1996) 39-62.
44.
NWB Team.Network Workbench Tool. Indiana University, Northeastern University, and University of Michigan (2006) Available at: http://nwb.slis.indiana.edu
45.
H.D. White .Pathfinder networks and author cocitation analysis: A remapping of paradigmatic information scientists, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology54(5) (2003) 423-434.
46.
H.D. White and K.W. McCain .Visualizing a discipline: An author co-citation analysis of information science, 1972-1995, Journal of the American Society for Information Science49(4) (1998) 327-355.
47.
F. Åström .Changes in the LIS research front: Time-sliced cocitation analyses of LIS journal articles, 1990-2004, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology58(7) (2007) 947-957.
