바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society

  • P-ISSN2466-2542
  • KCI

Article Contents

Prev Next
e-Submission

Vol.48 No.1

Citation Share

Trends of Qualitative Research in Korean Library and Information Science Journals

Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society / Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society, (P)2466-2542;
2017, v.48 no.1, pp.373-396
https://doi.org/10.16981/kliss.48.1.201703.373

(2017). Trends of Qualitative Research in Korean Library and Information Science Journals. Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society, 48(1), 373-396, https://doi.org/10.16981/kliss.48.1.201703.373

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine the trends of qualitative research in four representative journals in Korean LIS from 1970 to 2016. 73 papers(1.4%) were analyzed focusing on publication year, subject areas, research purposes, authors, qualitative methods, research participants, data collection methods, data analysis methods, and methods of validation. The findings are as follows: 1) Information behaviour(39.7%) was the most researched topics, followed by librarians work(20.5%), and bibliotherapy & reading education(13.6%). 2) The most frequently used research purpose was for understanding experiences(60.2%) and for improving current state(30.1%). 3) ‘Grounded theory’(13.6%) and ‘phenomenology’(10.9%), ‘case study’(10.9%), were used frequently, while ‘non-specified qualitative method’ was 26.0% and ‘not indicated’ was 21.9%. 4) Librarians (41.0%) were the most researched participants, followed by professionals(13.6%). To collect qualitative data, in-depth interview(20.5%), interview(13.6%), and in-depth interview & internal documents(9.5%) were frequently used. There are ‘loose qualitative research’ group and ‘scientific qualitative research’ group. LIS researchers using qualitative research methods should consistently make efforts to increase qualitative theory and the philosophical assumptions, and to apply rigorous research method (data collection, analysis and interpretation, sampling, data saturation, validity and reliability). Institutionally, It is to provide ‘qualitative research methods’ course and to develop guidelines and standards for LIS qualitative research authors and reviewers.

keywords
Qualitative research, Research trends, Library and information science, 질적 연구, 연구 동향, 문헌정보학

Reference

1.

김갑선. 2015. 문헌정보학의 질적 연구방법 교육내용 개발. 한국도서관·정보학회지 , 46(3):255-275.

2.

김정근. 1998. 학술연구에서 문화기술법이란 무엇인가 . 서울: 한울.

3.

김정근, 김순화. 1997. 우리나라 시지역 공공도서관의 시설과 인적현황에 대한 질적 분석: 백두시를 중심으로. 한국도서관·정보학회지 , 26: 333-363.

4.

김정근, 이용재. 1996. 한국문헌정보학 연구와 문화기술적 방법. 한국도서관·정보학회지 , 24:107-161.

5.

김정근, 장덕현. 1994. 우리나라 공공도서관 발전의 현단계에 관한 연구: 부산 경남지역 공공도서관 사서의 일상적 의식세계에 대한 질적분석. 한국문헌정보학회지 , 27: 3-73.

6.

김정근, 장덕현. 1999. 문헌정보학에 있어서 일상생활 연구의 방법론적 함의. 한국도서관·정보학회지 , 30(2): 55-75.

7.

설문원, 차미경. 1999. 문헌정보학에 있어서 질적 연구의 의의와 과제. 이화여자대학교 문헌정보학과 창립 40주년 기념논문집 . 65-92.

8.

유기웅 외. 2012. 질적연구방법의 이해. 서울: 학지사.

9.

이명희. 2005. 문헌정보학 분야의 질적 연구 동향과 과제. 한국비블리아학회지 , 16(2):177-201.

10.

이수상. 1994. 한국 문헌정보학에 있어서 토착화 논의. 도서관 , 49(3): 63-84.

11.

이소연. 2000. 대학도서관 조직문화에 대한 질적 연구: 새천년 도서관 사례를 중심으로. 한국문헌정보학회지 , 34(4): 123-142.

12.

이제환, 윤유라. 2005. 외국인 노동자 H의 삶과 정보빈곤. 한국비블리아학회지 , 16(1): 181-202.

13.

이제환, 이연옥, 장덕현. 2004. 소외집단에 대한 정보행태 연구의 방법론적 특성. 한국도서관·정보학회지 , 35(2): 273-295.

14.

이호신. 2015. 문헌정보학 연구방법으로서의 이야기: 내러티브 탐구를 중심으로. 한국문헌정보학회지 , 49(1):149-172.

15.

장덕현. 2001. 문헌정보학에 있어서 담론분석의 응용. 한국도서관·정보학회지 , 32(2):269-288.

16.

장덕현. 2002. 정보장애 연구에 있어서 문화기술법의 적용에 관한 고찰. 한국도서관·정보학회지 , 33(4):1-18.

17.

정진수. 2003. 풍부한 정보 환경에서 정보와 함께 하는 학습: 인지기술 활용을 중심으로. 『한국정보관리학회지 , 20(4호): 135-158.

18.

Bamkin, Marianne, Sally Maynard, and Anne Goulding. 2016. “Grounded Theory and Ethnography Combined: A Methodology to Study Children’s Interactions on Children’s Mobile Libraries.” Journal of Documentation, 72(2): 214–231.

19.

Budd, John M. 2005. “Phenomenology and Information Studies.” Journal of Documentation, 61(1): 44-59.

20.

Cibangu, Sylvain K. and Mark Hepworth. 2016. “The Uses of Phenomenology and Phenomenography: A Critical Review.” Library & Information Science Research, 38(2): 148-160.

21.

Cook, Douglas, and Lesley Farmer. ed. 2011. Using Qualitative Methods in Action Research: How Librarians Can Get to the Why of Data. Association of College and Research Libraries, Chicago, IL.

22.

Eisenhart, Margaret and Susan Jurow. 2011. Teaching Qualitative Research in The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. 4th ed. ed. by Denzin, Norman K. Yvonna S. Lincoln. Los Angeles: Sage.

23.

Forster, Marc. 2015. “Phenomenography: A Methodology for Information Literacy Research.” Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 48(4): 353-362.

24.

Frohmann, Bernd. 1994. “Discourse Analysis as a Research Method in Library and Information Science.” Library & Information Science Research, 16(2): 119-138.

25.

Gorman, G.E., and Peter Clayton. ed. 2005. Qualitative Research for the Information Professional: A Practical Handbook. 2nd ed. Facet Publishing, London.

26.

Lincoln, Yvonna S. and Egon G. Guba. 1985. Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, Calif. : Sage Publication.

27.

Seldén, Lars. 2005. “On Grounded Theory: With Some Malice.” Journal of Documentation, 61(1): 114-129.

28.

Talja, Sanna. 1999. “Analyzing Qualitative Interview Data: The Discourse Analytic Method.” Library & Information Science Research, 21(4): 459-477.

29.

Tan, Jin. 2010. “Grounded Theory in Practice: Issues and Discussion for New Qualitative Researchers.” Journal of Documentation, 66(1): 93-112.

30.

Trace, Ciaran B. 2016. “Ethnomethodology: Foundational Insights on the Nature and Meaning of Documents in Everyday Life.” Journal of Documentation, 72(1): 47-64.

31.

Westbrook, Lynn. 1994. “Qualitative Research Methods: A Review of Major Stages, Data Analysis Techniques, and Quality Controls.” Library & Information Science Research, 16(3): 241-254.

Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society

e-Submission OA Policy