Journal of Library Metadata

1.2k citations
223 papers · indexed · active since 1950

Impact in

    • Digital and Traditional Archives Management
    • Library Science and Information Systems
    • Research Data Management Practices
    • Digital Rights Management and Security

Papers in

    • Digital and Traditional Archives Management 68
    • Library Science and Information Systems 98
    • Research Data Management Practices 59
    • Digital Rights Management and Security 34

Journal of Library Metadata

193 papers receiving 999 citations

Peers

Journal of Library Metadata
Comparison fields: 5 of 100
  • Conservation 296
  • Information Systems 809
  • Library and Information Sciences 41
  • Information Systems and Management 162
  • Management Science and Operations Research 233
Replace New Review of Information Networking with:
New Review of Information Networking United Kingdom
Digital Library Perspectives United States
Journal of Archival Organization United States
Journal of Electronic Publishing United States
Journal of Map & Geography Libraries United States
Archives and Manuscripts Australia
Journal of the Australian Library and Information Association Australia
African Journal of Library Archives and Information Science Nigeria
New Review of Hypermedia and Multimedia United States
Archives and Records United Kingdom
Journal of Library Metadata relative to New Review of Information Networking United Kingdom New Review of Information Networking's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×2.9×
New Review of Information Networking · 1×
Citations per year

Countries where authors publish in Journal of Library Metadata

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Journal of Library Metadata. 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 published in Journal of Library Metadata with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Journal of Library Metadata more than expected).

Fields of papers published in Journal of Library Metadata

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

About Journal of Library Metadata

The 223 papers published in Journal of Library Metadata in the last decades have received a total of 1.2k indexed citations . Papers published in Journal of Library Metadata usually cover Conservation (70 papers), Information Systems (169 papers), Information Systems and Management (27 papers), Space and Planetary Science (4 papers) and Library and Information Sciences (4 papers) specifically the topics of Library Science and Information Systems (98 papers), Digital and Traditional Archives Management (68 papers), Semantic Web and Ontologies (59 papers), Research Data Management Practices (59 papers), Digital Rights Management and Security (34 papers), Data Quality and Management (29 papers), Digital Humanities and Scholarship (26 papers) and Scientific Computing and Data Management (26 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Journal of Library Metadata are Oksana L. Zavalina, Jian Qin, Timothy W. Cole, Jane Greenberg, Diane Rasmussen Pennington, Dong Joon Lee, Heather Lea Moulaison, Ixchel M. Faniel, Besiki Stvilia and Elizabeth Yakel.

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 journals with similar magnitude of impact