Comparative Study of the “Book Reviews” in Iran and the World Based on the Web of Science Data Base

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 M.A. of Scientometics, Regional Information Center for Science and Technology (RICeST), Shiraz, Iran

2 Assistant Prof. of information science and Knowledge . Islamic World Science Citation Center (ISC), Research Department of Scientometrics.

3 Associate Prof. of Information Science and Knowledge Regional Information Center for Science and Technology (RICeST), Research Department of Evaluation and Collection Developemnt Shiraz, Iran.

Abstract

A book review is significant because besides being used by librarians in libraries and information centers to select books. It also helps readers and researchers inform about new books that its least advantage is saving time and careful selection. The effectiveness of new knowledge requires an application— generating knowledge alone and without using previous knowledge cannot achieve its objective, which is to increase awareness. The book review is a way to make the works known and provide proper awareness for society.
Regarding the importance of book reviews and the applications of scientometrics in identifying the subject of research and considering that the initial studies of researchers show that there are few studies on analyzing book reviews on the WoS at the global level and specifically in Iran, this research was done to review and analyze “book reviews” indexed in the WoS databases, focusing on the activities of Iranian researchers, and through a comparative study of the situation in Iran with other countries in the world.
Methodology: The research adopted a descriptive-analytical survey method and a scientometrics approach. The population consists of all book reviews in 10 years (2010-2019) indexed in the Web of Science databases. To limit publications to book reviews, the book review option was selected. Based on this, 766,100 records were retrieved, which formed the current research population. To analyze the research data, Excel and VOSViewer were employed to draw the map to achieve coherent and clear networks.
Findings: The research showed that in the ten years from 2010 to 2019, book reviews covered approximately 3% of the total scientific production in the world and about 0.1% of Iranian documents. The results on Iran’s position in book review demonstrated the rank 47th in the world: in Iran, the book reviews growth rate is 0.07. The study of book reviews by subject in the world based on the 22 subjects of the ESI database showed that the interdisciplinary field is in the first rank, the field of psychiatry and psychology is in the second rank, and the social/general sciences are ranked the third. The findings showed that management, libraries, information retrieval, and librarians, which are part of the interdisciplinary fields, are hot and widely used topics. But in Iran, topics of gender, identity, evolution, capitalism, and ethics are the hot topics of book reviews. In the international arena and management, libraries, information retrieval, and librarians are the hot topics of a book review. This shows that the more specific issues of book review in the world and Iran have different directions and the trend in Iran is not in line with the global trend.
Conclusion: Book review publications have a lower growth rate than entire publications. Based on the subject map, the book review topics are different in the world and Iran. The collaborative coefficient of Iranian authors shows that co-authorship in book reviews is not favorable. According to the pattern of co-authorship of book reviews by Iranian researchers, the coefficient of participation of authors in these articles is 0.092, which shows that a person individually has mostly written book reviews in Iran and there is less the researchers’ willingness to participate.

Keywords

References

پایدار، شاهدخت. (1398). تحلیل علم‌سنجی وضعیت کشورهای خاورمیانه از نظر تولید مدارک «نقد و بررسی کتاب» در بازه زمانی 2009 تا 2018. پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد. دانشگاه پیام نور، مرکز کرمانشاه.
دانشنامه اسلامی (1399). حاشیه. قابل دسترسی از http://wiki.ahlolbait.com/%D8%AD%D8%A7%D8%B4%DB%8C%D9%87   
درودی، فریبرز. (1393). درآمدی بر انواع نقد و کارکردهای آن، فصلنامه نقد کتاب اطلاع‌رسانی و ارتباطات،1 (3 و 4)، 221-234.
دیانی، محمدحسین. (1380). مجموعه‌سازی و فراهم‌آوری در کتابخانه‌ها، اهواز، دانشگاه شهید چمران اهواز.
رکن‌آبادی، مرتضی. (1395). مقایسه آمار کتاب‌خوانی در ایران و جهان، خبرگزاری صدا و سیما، دسترسی در تاریخ 1/11/1398: http://www.iribnews.ir/fa/news/1106776
زرین‌کوب، عبدالحسین. (1373). آشنایی با نقد ادبی، تهران، انتشارات امیرکبیر.
زرین‌کوب، عبدالحسین. (1382). نقد ادبی، چاپ هفتم، تهران، انتشارات امیرکبیر.
زرین‌کوب، عبدالحسین. (1389). نقد ادبی، چاپ نهم، تهران، انتشارات امیرکبیر.
سلطانی، محمدعلی. (1369). ضرورت و شیوه نقد کتاب، آینه پژوهش، 1 (1)، 10-17.
سلیمان‌زاده نجفی، نیره‌سادات، اشرفی‌ریزی، حسن. (1393)، ارزیابی مقالات نقد کتاب منتشرشده در مجله کتاب ماه: کلیات بر اساس مدل BREM، نشریه تحقیقات کتابداری و اطلاع‌رسانی دانشگاهی، 48 (3): 459-476.
کائدی، شهره. (1394). تأملی در نقد ادبی کتاب کودک و نوجوان در دهه‌های 70 و 80، فصلنامه نقد کتاب، 2 (7-8).
گودرزی، ساره. (1397). رشد 21 برابری عناوین کتاب در چهار دهه اخیر، خبرگزاری کتاب ایران، دسترسی در
https://www.ibna.ir/fa/report/267562
مهراد، جعفر، بینش، سیده مژگان. (1390). پیشگامان علمی جهان اسلام. شیراز: انتشارات نوید.
 
 
 
Ajiferuke I, Burell Q, & Tague J. (1998). Single Measure of the Degree of Collabortion in Research. Scientometrics, 14, 421–433. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02017100
Caldwell, K., Henshaw, L., & Taylor, G. (2005). Developing a framework for critiquing health research. Journal of Health, Social and Environmental Issues, 6 (1), 45-54. 10.1016/j.nedt.2010.11.025
Dayani, M. H. (2001). Collection development lilbraries, Ahvaz, Shahid Chamran University. [In Persian].

Doroudi, F. (2014). An introduction to the types of criticism and its functions.  Information & Communication Quarterly Book Review, 1(3&4)221-234. Retrieved from http://icbr.faslnameh.org/files/site1/user_files_bbc6cb/maryamtavakol-A-10-24-60-3e12de4.pdf  [in Persian].

East, J. W. (2011). The scholarly book review in the humanities: An academic Cinderella? Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 43 (1), 52–67. 10.1353/scp.2011.0046
Encyclopedia of Islam (2020). Annotating. Retrieved From https://wiki.ahlolbait.com/%D8%AD%D8%A7%D8%B4%DB%8C%D9%87 [in Persian]
Fallik, S., & Francis, J. (2017). Content Analysis: A Book Review of this Analytical Tool.
Fleenor, J. W. (2004). Book reviewing as an important scholarly activity. Personnel Psychology, 57 (4), 1036-1037. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2004.014_1.x
Godarzi, S. (2018). An overview of book publication statistics after the Islamic Revolution: 21 times growth of book titles in the last four decades. Iran’s Book News Agency, 14, November, 267562. Retrieved from https://www.ibna.ir/fa/report/267562 [in Persian]
Gorraiz, J., Gumpenberger, C., & Purnell, P. J. (2014). The power of book reviews: A simple and transparent enhancement approach for book citation indexes. Scientometrics, 98 (2), 841-852. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1176-4
Hartley, J., & Ho, Y. S. (2017). The decline and fall of book reviews in psychology: a bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics, 112 (1), 655-657. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2256-7
Jones, R. J., Fleenor, J. & SummersL. (2004). Book Reviews and Scientist-Practitioner Currency: A Critical Lever. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 41 (4), 22-25.
Journal Citation Reports: Difference between JCR quartile and ESI quartile. Aug 13, 2019. Retrieved from: https://support.clarivate.com/ScientificandAcademicResearch/s/article/Journal-Citation-Reports-Difference-between-JCR-quartile-and-ESI-quartile?language=en_US   
Kaedi, Sh. (2016). A contemplation on the literary criticism of children's and adolescent books in the 90s and 20s. Children &Young Adults Quarterly Book Review, 2(7&8). 2019-2016. [in Persian]
Leydesdorff, L., & Wagner, C. (2009). Is the United States losing ground in science? A global perspective on the world science system. Scientometrics, 78 (1), 23–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-008-1830-4
Liu, W., Ding, Y., & Gu, M. (2017). Book reviews in academic journals: Patterns and dynamics. Scientometrics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2172-2
Lowman, RL. (1998). The ethical practice of psychology in organizations. Washington, D.C.: APA.
Mehrad, J. & Binesh, S.M. (2011). Scientific pioneers of the Islamic world. Shiraz: Navid Publisher.
Nederhof, A. J. (2006). Bibliometric monitoring of research performance in the social sciences and the humanities: A review. Scientometrics, 66(1), 81-100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0007-2
Nicolaisen, J. (2002). The scholarliness of published peer reviews: A bibliometric study of book reviews in selected social science fields. Research Evaluation, 11 (3), 129-140. https://doi.org/10.3152/147154402781776808
Obeng-Odoom, F. (2014). Why write book reviews? Australian Universities’ Review, 56 (1), 78–82.
Payedar, Sh. (2019). Scientometrics analysis of "book reviews" in the Middle East countries between 2009 and 2018. M. A. thesis, Payam-e-Noor University, Kermanshah.
Rouknabadi, M. (2016). Comparison of reading statistics in Iran and the world. IRIB NEWS AGENCY, 23 April, 1106776. Retrieved from http://www.iribnews.ir/fa/news/1106776 [in Persian]
ScienceWatch: field definitions [website]. Retrieved 2015, Dec. 5, from http://archive.sciencewatch.com/about/met/fielddef/   
Soleimanzade Najafi, N.; Ashrafi Rizi, H. (2014). Assessment of Articles published in the Ketab-mah: Kolliat Based on BREM. Academic Librarianship and Information Research, 48(3), 459-476. [In Persian]
Soltani, M.A. (1990). The necessity and method of book criticism. Ayeneh-ye-Pazhoohesh, 1(1), 10-17. [in Persian]
Spink, A., Robins, D., & Schamber, L. (1998). Use of scholarly book reviews: Implications for electronic publishing and scholarly communication. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49 (4), 364-374. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(19980401)49:4<364::AID-ASI6>3.0.CO;2-3
Van Leeuwen, T., Moed, H., Tijssen, R., Visser, M., & Van Raan, A. (2001). Language biases in the coverage of the Science Citation Index and its consequencesfor international comparisons of national research performance. Scientometrics, 51(1), 335-346. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1010549719484
Wei, Y., & Fan, W. (2018). A study of book reviews in SCI-Expanded, SSCI, and A&HCI journals by researchers from five countries: 2006–2015. Scientometrics, 115 (2), 637-654.
Zarinkoob, AH. (2003). Literary criticism. 7th edition. Tehran: Amir Kabir Publishers. [in Persian]
Zarinkoob, AH. (2010). Literary criticism. ninth edition, Amir Kabir Publishers. [in Persian]
Zarinkoob, AH.(1994). Introduction to literary criticism. Tehran, Amir Kabir Publishers. [in Persian]

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics