The Relation Between the Structure of Abstracts in LIS and Anthropology Journals and Their Rank

Abstract

Purpose/Thesis: The study determines: (1) which of the commonly expected elements of abstracts feature in library and information science (LIS) and anthropology journals; (2) whether there is a relationship between the journal rank as measured by the Impact Factor and the number of components present in the journal’s abstracts.Approach/Methods: The research had two main stages. Firstly, the scope of research was determined by selecting specific disciplines and journals. Secondly, randomly selected abstracts were analyzed to see if the key components were present. Results and conclusions: The key abstract components (background, purposes, methods, results) do not vary across the journals from both disciplines. In general, the abstracts from journals of higher rank are longer than those from journals of lower rank and have more components present. The results were proven for LIS and anthropology but the pattern may hold true for journals from other disciplines. This requires further research.Originality/Value: The study extends prior research by correlating the completeness of information included in abstracts with journal rank measured by Impact Factor.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 5 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.