Research productivity serves as a manifestation of faculty’s research achievements and reflects their research capabilities. This study focuses on the research productivity of library and information science faculty in selected North American universities. The primary objective is to explore the factors influencing research productivity, including academic degree, professional cadre, and educational background. Furthermore, this study proposes targeted suggestions to enhance faculty’s research productivity and optimize the research environment. The findings indicate significant variations in scientific research productivity among library and information science teachers in North America. Academic degree exerts a significant positive influence on research productivity, while professional cadre demonstrates a limited but positive impact. However, the effect of educational background on research productivity is not significant based on this study. This research provides valuable insights for the development of scientific research productivity in the field of library and information science.
AbramoGD’AngeloCADi CostaF (2009) Research collaboration and productivity: Is there correlation?Higher Education57(2): 155–171.
2.
AkosileAOlatokunW (2020) Factors influencing knowledge sharing among academics in Bowen University, Nigeria. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science52(2): 410–427.
3.
AksnesDWRorstadKPiroF, et al. (2011) Are female researchers less cited? A large-scale study of Norwegian scientists. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology62(4): 628–636.
4.
Armijos ValdiviesoPAvolio AlecchiBArévalo-AvecillasD (2022) Factors that influence the individual research output of university professors: The case of Ecuador, Peru, and Colombia. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education21(4): 450–468.
5.
AydinOT (2017) Research performance of higher education institutions: A review on the measurements and affecting factors of research performance. Journal of Higher Education and Science7: 312.
6.
BaryshevRAVerkhovetsSVBabinaOI (2018) The smart library project: Development of information and library services for educational and scientific activity. Electronic Library36(3): 535–549.
7.
BentleyP (2012) Gender differences and factors affecting publication productivity among Australian university academics. Journal of Sociology48(1): 85–103.
8.
BentleyRJ (1990) Faculty research performance over time and its relationship to sources of grant support. Doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, America.
9.
CastilloJAPowellMA (2020) Research Productivity and international collaboration: A study of Ecuadorian Science. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education19(4): 369–387.
10.
CequnL (1995) Bibliometric index and model of scientific research ability evaluation of academic institutions. Information Studies: Theory and Application05: 14–17.
11.
ChangYW (2018) Examining interdisciplinarity of library and information science (LIS) based on LIS articles contributed by non-LIS authors. Scientometrics116(3): 1589–1613.
12.
ChenWYangW (2022) What kind of professional title structure of university teachers helps to obtain academic resources and improve output?Research in Higher Education342(2): 48–54.
13.
CongbinGQimingS (2015) A comparative analysis of Chinese mainland universities and world-class universities – From the perspective of university ranking. Educational Researcher36(2): 147–157.
14.
ConklinMDesselleS (2006) Factors associated with research productivity among pharmacy academicians. AAS Open Research4(1): 26–36.
15.
DimzovSMatošicMUremI (2021) University rankings and institutional affiliations: Role of academic librarians. Journal of Academic Librarianship47(5): 102387.
16.
DiWZhouL (2023) Study on the differences of users’ needs for university libraries’ digital scholarship services: From a perspective of research lifecycle. Library and Information Service67(18): 57–68.
17.
FarmadSAEsfidaniAShahbaziS (2023) A comparative study of the curriculum in master degree of medical education in Iran and some selected countries. BMC Medical Education23(1): 393.
18.
FennewaldJ (2008) Research productivity among librarians: Factors leading to publications at Penn State. College & Research Libraries69(2): 104–116.
19.
FreemanLC (1978) Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social Networks1(3): 215–239.
20.
GomesUEOliveiraDLDBertiLC, et al. (2011) 37 Years of scientific activity in a biochemistry department in Brazil: Patterns of growth and factors leading to increased productivity. Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciencias83(3): 1121–1130.
21.
GuiQLiuCDuD (2018) Does network position foster knowledge production? Evidence from international scientific collaboration network. Growth and Change49(4): 594–611.
22.
GyőrffyBNagyAMHermanP, et al. (2018) Factors influencing the scientific performance of Momentum grant holders: An evaluation of the first 117 research groups. Scientometrics117(1): 409–426.
23.
HedjaziYBehravanJ (2011) Study of factors influencing research productivity of agriculture faculty members in Iran. Higher Education62(5): 635–647.
24.
HengKHamidMOKhanA (2020) Factors influencing academics’ research engagement and productivity: A developing countries perspective. Issues in Educational Research30(3): 965–987.
25.
HjørlandB (2018) Library and information science (LIS), Part 1. Knowledge Organization45(3): 232–254.
26.
HuangZZongQXieY (2023) The individual characteristics, organizational characteristics and research productivity of early career LIS researchers in China’s mainland: A crisp set qualitative comparative analysis (csQCA). Journal of Librarianship and Information Science55(3): 658–670.
27.
HuQGillTG (2000) IS faculty research productivity: Influential factors and implications. Information Resources Management Journal13(2): 15–25.
28.
IbegbulamIJJacinthaEU (2016) Factors that contribute to research and publication output among librarians in Nigerian university libraries. Journal of Academic Librarianship42(1): 15–20.
29.
JieZLanG (2021) Teachers’ overseas experience and scientific research output: Based on least square method and propensity core matching model. Review of Higher Education9(6): 30–37.
30.
JihongGYuxiangGLiH (2023) Education for postgraduate information literacy from the perspective of Scientific Research Lifecycle. Library Development322(4): 166–171.
31.
JingjingXJiaoKZhangX, et al. (2016) Study of the research support service based on research life cycle in foreign academic libraries. Information Studies:Theory and Application39(05): 110–114.
32.
JungJ (2012) Faculty research productivity in Hong Kong across academic discipline. Higher Education Studies2(4): 1.
33.
JungS&김 (2011) A study on renewal strategy of university symbols maintaining it’s traditionality. Journal of the Korean Society of Design Culture17(4): 574–583.
34.
KimJDiesnerJ (2014) A network-based approach to coauthorship credit allocation. Scientometrics101(1): 587–602.
35.
LeeJYKamMHanNG, et al. (2016) Analysis of the role of library and information science related research efforts in Korean human computer interaction subject field. Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management33(2): 177–200.
36.
LeeY-H (2021) Determinants of research productivity in Korean universities: The role of research funding. Journal of Technology Transfer46(5): 1462–1486.
37.
LiuXZFangH (2012) Fairly sharing the credit of multi-authored papers and its application in the modification of h-index and g-index. Scientometrics91(1): 37–49.
38.
LiuY (2023) Research on the measurement of science and technology output performance of higher education institutions, driving mechanisms and improvement strategies. Master Thesis, China University of Mining and Technology, China.
39.
LongJSAllisonPDMcGinnisR (1993) Rank advancement in academic careers: Sex differences and the effects of productivity. American Sociological Review58(5): 703–722.
40.
LongRCrawfordAWhiteM, et al. (2009) Determinants of faculty research productivity in information systems: An empirical analysis of the impact of academic origin and academic affiliation. Scientometrics78(2): 231–260.
41.
LuJ (2021) The influence factors on scientific research outputs of higher education discipline teachers – Based on a demographic perspective. Master Thesis, Lanzhou University, China.
42.
LundB (2019) Examination of correlates of H-index as a measure of research productivity for library and information science faculty in the United States and Canada. Scientometrics120(2): 897–915.
43.
MeschedeCHenkelM (2019) Library and information science and sustainable development: A structured literature review. Journal of Documentation75(6): 1356–1369.
44.
MingdongH (2008) Analysis on faculty development in higher education institutions in North America. Journal of Higher Education29(6): 63–69.
45.
MohammadiEOlejniczakAJWalkerGE, et al. (2023) The impact of geographic inequality in federal research funding: A comparative longitudinal study of research and scholarly outputs in EPSCoR versus non-EPSCoR states. PLoS One18(6): e0286991.
46.
Moya-AnegónFGuerrero-BoteVPBornmannL, et al. (2013) The research guarantors of scientific papers and the output counting: A promising new approach. Scientometrics97(2): 421–434.
47.
MurrayM (2017) Predicting scientific research output at the University of KwaZulu-Natal. South African Journal of Science110(3/4): 1–4.
48.
NarváezJBurgosJ (2011) The research into productivity of university teachers. Scientific E-Journal of Human Sciences18(7): 116–140.
49.
NCES (2023) Report on the Condition of Education 2023. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
50.
NCSES (2023) Doctorate Recipients from U.S. Universities: 2022 (No. NSF 24-300). Alexandria, VA: Directorate for Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences, National Science Foundation.
51.
NguyenDTueND (2020) Determinants of university research and development outcomes - a study from faculty’s perspectives. International Journal of Innovation and Learning28: 82–97.
52.
NguyenNDNguyenTDDaoKT (2021) Effects of institutional policies and characteristics on research productivity at Vietnam science and technology universities. Heliyon7(1): e06024.
53.
Olmeda-GómezCde Moya-AnegónF (2016) Publishing trends in Library and Information Sciences across European countries and Institutions. Journal of Academic Librarianship42(1): 27–37.
54.
PrpićK (1996) Scientific fields and eminent scientists’ productivity patterns and factors. Scientometrics37(3): 445–471.
55.
RehmanIUWaniJAGanaieSA (2023) Gauging the research performance of BRICS in the domain of library and information science through performance analysis and Science mapping. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science. Epub ahead of print 25 May 2023. DOI: 10.1177/09610006231173464.
56.
Ronda-PupoGAGuerras-MartínLÁ (2013) Red de cooperación institucional de investigación en dirección de empresas en españa en torno a la revista CEDE: 1998-2010. Cuadernos de Economía y Dirección de la Empresa16(1): 1–16.
57.
RørstadKAksnesDW (2015) Publication rate expressed by age, gender and academic position – A large-scale analysis of Norwegian academic staff. Journal of Informetrics9(2): 317–333.
58.
ShiYWangDZhangZ (2022) Categorical evaluation of scientific research efficiency in Chinese universities: Basic and applied research. Sustainability14(8): 4402.
59.
ShonheL (2020) Continuous professional development (CPD) of librarians: A bibliometric analysis of research productivity viewed through WoS. Journal of Academic Librarianship46(2): 102106.
60.
ShuFLariviereVMongeonP, et al. (2016) On the evolution of library and information science doctoral dissertation topics in North America (1960–2013). Journal of Education for Library and Information Science Online57(2): 131–142.
61.
SinclairJBarnacleRCuthbertD (2014) How the doctorate contributes to the formation of active researchers: What the research tells us. Studies in Higher Education39(10): 1972–1986.
62.
SmebyJCTryS (2005) Departmental contexts and faculty research activity in Norway. Research in Higher Education46(6): 593–619.
63.
SongYZhuLShuF (2021) On the evolution of library and information science doctoral dissertation topics in China. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science53(2): 298–306.
64.
SugimotoCRRussellTGMehoLI, et al. (2008) MPACT and citation impact: Two sides of the same scholarly coin?Library & Information Science Research30(4): 273–281.
65.
SukocoBMPutraRAMuqaffiHN, et al. (2023) Comparative study of ASEAN research productivity. Sage Open13(1): 21582440221145157.
66.
TienFFBlackburnRT (1996) Faculty rank system, research motivation, and faculty research productivity: Measure refinement and theory testing. Journal of Higher Education67(1): 2–22.
67.
TimakumTKimGSongM (2020) A data-driven analysis of the knowledge structure of library science with full-text journal articles. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science52(2): 345–365.
68.
Valles-ValenzuelaJPérez-CárcelesMDOsunaE, et al. (2009) Quantitative analysis of Spanish university scientific output in the area of legal and forensic medicine: International exposure. Scientometrics78(3): 383–395.
69.
VysakhCBabuHR (2021) Who reads Indian and Chinese LIS articles on Mendeley? Scoping and comparing user categories through Altmetrics. Journal of Information Science Theory and Practice9(4): 75–83.
70.
WangL (2018) Twinning data science with information science in schools of library and information science. Journal of Documentation74(6): 1243–1257.
71.
WeijieYZhouYJinchiW (2020) Investigation and research on the status of Chinese postgraduates’ data literacy in scientific research activities——From the perspective of dual life cycles. Library and Information Service64(07): 84–93.
72.
WenwenLPingZ (2017) Research on strategies of scientific literacy education based on the life cycle of scientific research. Journal of Modern Information37(01): 156–159.
73.
WichianSNWongwanichSBowarnkitiwongS (2009) Factors affecting research productivity of faculty members in government universities: Lisrel and neural network analyses. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences30(1): 67–78.
74.
WuJOuGLiuX, et al. (2022) How does academic education background affect top researchers’ performance? Evidence from the field of artificial intelligence. Journal of Informetrics16(2): 101292.
75.
XiaonaZ (2019) Bibliometric analysis on the academic age of scholars of Library and information science based on Chinese core journals. Information Research01: 62–66.
76.
XiaoXZhangFLiJ (2015) Library and information science research in China—A survey based analysis of 10 LIS educational institutes. Journal of Academic Librarianship41(3): 330–340.
77.
YanhuiSLiZFeiS, et al. (2022) Research on the interdisciplinary Development of Library and Information Science Doctoral Dissertations in China and North America. Journal of the China Society for Scientific and Technical Information41(5): 536–548.
78.
YnalvezMAShrumWM (2011) Professional networks, scientific collaboration, and publication productivity in resource-constrained research institutions in a developing country. Research Policy40(2): 204–216.
79.
YuL (2016) Introduction to Library and Information Science. Beijing: National Library Press.
80.
YunhuaDHongS (2022) Intrinsically motivated or externally driven? Research output of university teachers and its influence mechanism. Fudan Education Forum20(1): 78–85.
81.
ZhuW (2023) How is the development of library and information science in China?Library Hi Tech. DOI: 10.1108/lht-04-2023-0148.
82.
ZongFWangL (2017) Evaluation of university scientific research ability based on the output of sci-tech papers: A D-AHP approach. PLoS One12(2): e0171437.
