Abstract

Library historians use primarily qualitative research methods, unlike most in LIS, who adopt social science research methods. This contrast becomes problematic when evaluating the goodness of historical research. This article briefly explores this conflict and crosses the methodological divide by adapting both bibliometrics and qualitative approaches to examine four volumes from the Journal of Library History (1967, 1977) and its successor, Libraries & Culture (1987, 1997), in order to observe transitions. The sample, 497 citations from 53 articles, was tabulated by age, self-citation, and other factors to examine the goodness of historical research.

pdf

Additional Information

ISSN
2166-3033
Print ISSN
2164-8034
Pages
pp. 267-284
Launched on MUSE
2005-10-25
Open Access
No
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.