Home⇛Information Generation & Management⇛vol. 5 no. 1 (2025)

Bridging Disciplines: A Systematic Review of Interdisciplinary Studies in Library and Information Science

Donna Lyn Gonzaga | Janice D. Penaflor | Efren Torres

Discipline: library and information science

 

Abstract:

Statement of the Problem. Interdisciplinary collaboration has become increasingly central to Library and Information Science (LIS) as the field confronts complex, multi-dimensional problems. This study assesses the status of interdisciplinary LIS research, examining annual publication trends, leading sources, research design, and contributing disciplines, and identifies the barriers and challenges that impede such collaboration. Methods. A systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis of 147 peer-reviewed journal articles published between 2013 and 2023 was undertaken. Results. Findings show a clear upward trajectory in interdisciplinary output, with peaks in 2021 and in 2023. Computer science and education emerge as the most active contributing disciplines, evidencing the reliance of LIS on technological innovation and pedagogical theory. The Journal of Documentation is the leading publication venue, underscoring its role as a primary outlet for cross-disciplinary scholarship within LIS. Methodologically, studies rely predominantly on qualitative and quantitative designs, while mixed-methods remain comparatively underutilized. Six recurrent impediments to interdisciplinary research were uncovered: conceptual misalignment among collaborative fields; institutional and structural barriers that limit support and incentives; gaps in cross-disciplinary skills and knowledge; communication and terminology differences that hamper mutual understanding; obstacles in publishing and peer review; and time and resource constraints linked to extended coordination and limited infrastructure. Originality. This research contributes a comprehensive, decadal synthesis of the LIS interdisciplinary landscape, bridging the gap between theoretical necessity and practical execution. The findings mirror broader interdisciplinary literature and highlight the need for policy reforms, targeted professional development, and more inclusive publishing models to advance integrative scholarship. Future work should include scoping reviews, network and text-mining analyses, and the development of metrics that capture the societal impact of interdisciplinary LIS research.



References:

  1. Atsız, O., Oğretmenoğlu, M., & Akova, O. (2022). A bibliometric analysis of length of stay studies in tourism. European Journal of Tourism Research, 31, 3101. https://doi.org/10.54055/ejtr.v31i.2305
  2. Baas, J., Schotten, M., Plume, A., Côté, G., & Karimi, R. (2020). Scopus as a curated, high-quality  bibliometric  data  source  for  academic  research  in  quantitative

  3. 18science studies. Quantitative Science Studies, 1(1), 377–386. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00019

    Bartlett, J. C., & Dalkir, K. (2020). Librarianship and beyond: The twenty-year evolution ofaninterdisciplinarycurriculum. Education for Information, 36(2), 139–155. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.3233/EFI-190313

  4. Christensen, J.  Ekelund,  N.,  Melin,  M.,  &  Widén,  P.  (2021).  The beautiful risk of collaborative and interdisciplinary research:  A challenging collaborative and critical approach toward sustainable learning processes in the academic profession. Sustainability, 13(9), 4723. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13094723
  5. Daniel, K. L., McConnell, M., Schuchardt, A., & Peffer, M. E. (2022). Challenges facing interdisciplinary   researchers:   Findings   from   a   professional   development workshop. PloS One, 17(4), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0267234
  6. Das, S., Tripathi, M., & Das, A. K. (2023). Components of digital humanities in Indian LIS curricula:  A conceptual analysis. DESIDOC Journal of Library and Information Technology, 43(4), 208-218. https://doi.org/10.14429/djlit.43.04.19218
  7. Feng, S.  & Kirkley, A.  (2020).  Mixing patterns in interdisciplinary co-authorship networks at multiple scales. Scientific Reports, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-64351-3 Gray, R.  (2020).  Why do all systematic reviews have fifteen studies? Nurse Author and Editor, 30, 27-29. https://doi.org/10.1111/nae2.8
  8. Huang, M. H., & Chang, Y. W. (2012). A comparative study of interdisciplinary changes between information science and library science. Scientometrics, 91(3), 789-803. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0619-7
  9. Institute of Medicine. (2005). Facilitating interdisciplinary research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/11153
  10. Kaffashan Kakhki, M., Zarqi, M., Harati, H., Asemandoreh, Y., & Namdar Joyame, E. (2022).  Innovation in using IT:  Understanding the impact of knowledge absorptive capacity on academic librarians. Library Hi Tech, 40(6), 1843-1868. 10.1108/LHT-03-2020-0065
  11. Klein, J.   T.   (2010). Creating   interdisciplinary   campus   cultures:   A   model   for sustainability and growth. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Klein, J.T. & Newell, W. (1997). Advancing interdisciplinary studies. In J. G. Gaff & J. Ratcliff (Eds.) Handbook of the undergraduate curriculum (pp. 393-415). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  12. Leahey, E.  (2018).  The perks and perils of interdisciplinary research. European Review 26(S2), S55-S67. https://doi.org/10.1017/S106279871800026119
  13. Leahey, E., & Barringer, S.  (2020).  Universities’ commitment to interdisciplinary research: To what end? Research Policy, 49(2), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2019.103910
  14. McNicol, S.   (2003).   LIS:   The   interdisciplinary   research   landscape. Journal   of Librarianship and Information Science, 35(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/096100060303500103
  15. Nahotko, M.   (2020).   Application   of   interdisciplinary   theory   of   genres   in   LIS. Zagadnienia   Informacji   Naukowej -Studia   Informacyjne, 58 (1A(115A)). https://doi.org/10.36702/zin.723
  16. Naseema S., & Sevukan R.  (2022).  Global research trends in research data management (RDM): Scientometric view. International Journal of Information Science and Management, 20(4), 117-135. 10.22034/ijism.2022.698421
  17. National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine. (2005). Facilitating interdisciplinary research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/11153
  18. Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P., Boutron, I., Hoffman, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennanm S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hrobjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald., S., ... Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guidelines for reporting systematic reviews. Systematic Reviews, 10(1), 89. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01626-4
  19. Piggott, B., Müller, S., Chivers, P., Papaluca, C., & Hoyne, G. (2018). Is sports science answering   the   call   for   interdisciplinary research?:  A   systematic   review. European Journal of Sport Science, 19(3), 267-286. https://doi.org/10.1080/17461391.2018.1508506
  20. Pischke, E.  C., Knowlton, J.  L., Phifer, C.  C., Gutierrez Lopez, J., Propato, T.  S., Eastmond, A., de Souza, T. M., Kuhlberg, M., Picasso Risso, V., Veron, S. R., Garcia, C., Chiappe, M., & Halvorsen, K. E. (2017). Barriers and solutions to conducting large international, interdisciplinary research projects. Environmental Management (New York), 60(6), 1011–1021.
  21. Prebor, G.  (2010).  Analysis of the interdisciplinary nature of library and information science. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 42(4), 256-267. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961000610380820
  22. Rahaman, S., Umakant, B. V., & Rahaman, M. R. (2023). Cloud computing in context with Library and Information Science (LIS):  A scientometric analysis and knowledge   mapping. International   Journal   of   Information   Science   and Management, 21(4), 67-82. 10.22034/ijism.2023.1977807.0
  23. Reed, E., & Johnson, B. (2023). Overview of cultural capital theory’s current impact and potential utility in academic libraries. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 49(6), 102782. 10.1016/j.acalib.2023.102782
  24. Repko, A. F. (2008). Interdisciplinary Research Process and Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Repko, A.  F. & Szostak, R.  (2017). Interdisciplinary research:  Process and theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  25. Saha, M., & Ghosh, S. (2023). Topic modelling in Library and Information Science from the primary data:  Swing in thrust areas. International Journal of Information Science and Management, 21(3), 19-34. 10.22034/ijism.2023.1977569.0 
  26. SiedlokF., & Hibbert P. (2014). The organization of interdisciplinary research: Modes, drivers and barriers. International Journal of Management Reviews, 16(2), 194–210. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12016
  27. Smye, S. W., & Frangi, A. F. (2021). Interdisciplinary research: shaping the healthcare of the future. Future Healthcare Journal, 8(2), e218-e223.
  28. Tian, P. & Wang, L. (2023). Exploring the topic structure and evolutionary trends of health informatics research in library and information science. The Electronic Library, 41(2/3), 308-325. https://doi.org/10.1108/EL-01-2023-0010
  29. Vajaradul, Y., Aroonsrimorakot, S., Laiphrakpam, M., & Paisantanakij, W. (2021). Key steps and characteristics for successful interdisciplinary research: an analytical review. The  Journal  of  Behavioral  Science,  16(2),  73-85.  https://so06.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/IJBS/article/view/245723
  30. Velez-Estevez,  A.,  Garcia-Sanchez,  P.,  Moral-Munoz,  J.  A.,  &  Cobo,  M.  .J.  (2022). Why  do  papers  from  international  collaborations  get  more  citations?  A bibliometric    analysis    of    Library    and    Information    Science    papers. Scientometrics, 127(12), 7517-7555. 10.1007/s11192-022-04486-4
  31. Wang, X. [Xu], Feng, X., & Guo, Y. (2023). Analysis of the structure and time-series evolution of knowledge label networks from a complex perspective. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 75(6), 1056-1078.https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-04-2022-0229
  32. Wang, X. [Xiaoguang], Gui, H., & Liu, J. (2023). How authors evaluate the novelty of their articles: A comparative analysis of highlights in research articles. Journal of Information Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/01655515231166924
  33. Wang, Z., Chen, J., Chen, J., & Chen, H. (2023). Identifying interdisciplinary topics and their evolution based on BERTopic. Scientometrics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-023-04776-5
  34. Wijewickrema, M. (2023). A bibliometric study on library and information science and information systems literature during 2010–2019. Library Hi Tech, 41(2), 595-621. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHT-06-2021-0198
  35. Wojcik, M. (2023). Areas and contexts of the use of robotics in libraries: An overview of the applied solutions and discussion of prospects. Library Hi Tech, 42(5), 1443-1456. 10.1108/LHT-10-2022-0487
  36. Wojcik, M.  (2022).  Brain computer interface in the context of information retrieval systems in a library. Library Hi Tech, 40(6), 1766-1781. https://10.1108/LHT-09-2020-0239
  37. Xu,  Z.,  Ge,  Z.,  Wang,  X.,  &  Kou,  G.  (2023).  A  look  at  the  focus  on  big  data  for information technology and decision making during 1994 to 2020. International Journal   of   Information   Technology   and   Decision   Making, 22(1), 7-35. 10.1142/S0219622022500298
  38. Yadav, A. (2021). Key skills and competencies of LIS professionals in the digital library environment: A content analysis of job advertisements. Library Management, 43(½), 50-65. https://doi.org/10.1108/LM-03-2021-0030
  39. Yang, Q., Shen, X., Song, Y., & Chen, S.  (2023).  A study of the impact of interdisciplinary citation on the aging of library and information science. Library Hi Tech, 42(5), 1634-1647. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHT-07-2022-0335
  40. Yueh, H.-P., Huang, C.-Y., & Lin, W.  (2022).  Examining the differences between information professional groups in perceiving information ethics:  An analytic hierarchy     process     study. Frontiers     in   Psychology, 13, 954827. https://10.3389/fpsyg.2022.954827
  41. Zeng, J., Cao, S., Chen, Y., Pan, P., & Cai, Y. (2023). Measuring the interdisciplinary characteristics of Chinese research in library and information science based on knowledge elements.  Aslib Journal of Information Management, 75(3), 589-617. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-03-2022-0130
  42. Zhou, H., Guns, R., & Engels, T.  C.  (2022).  Are social sciences becoming more interdisciplinary?   Evidence   from   publications   1960–2014. Journal   of   the Association   for   Information   Science   and Technology, 73(9), 1201-1221. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24627

Tools


Copyright © 2026  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic