Library and Information Sciences

35.2k papers and 246.4k indexed citations i.

About

35.2k papers covering Library and Information Sciences have received a total of 246.4k indexed citations since 1950. Papers on subfields are most often about the specific topic of Library Science and Information Literacy, Library Science and Administration and Web and Library Services and also cover the fields of Information Systems, Education and Communication. Papers citing papers on subfields are usually about Information Systems, Education and Communication. Some of the most active scholars covering Library and Information Sciences are Carol Collier Kuhlthau, Patricia A Iannuzzi, Annemareé Lloyd, Gary Marchionini, Reijo Savolainen, Elizabeth Wolfe Morrison, David Bawden, Constance A. Mellon, Heidi Julien and Megan Oakleaf.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers citing papers about Library and Information Sciences

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers covering Library and Information Sciences. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers covering Library and Information Sciences.

Countries where authors publish papers about Library and Information Sciences

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research in Library and Information Sciences. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by papers about Library and Information Sciences with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Library and Information Sciences more than expected).

Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar’s output or impact.

Explore fields with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2025