Analysis of anti-racism, equity, inclusion and social justice initiatives in library and information science literature

16Citations
Citations of this article
48Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Purpose: The objective of this study is to establish the current state of library and information science (LIS) scholarship pertaining to anti-racism, equity, inclusion and social justice initiatives. Design/methodology/approach: Using comprehensive search strategies, three LIS databases were searched for relevant literature published in the last 10 years and results were exported and de-duplicated using Endnote. Citations were screened by two blinded, independent reviewers based on pre-defined eligibility criteria. Citations in the final data set were then hand coded by three reviewers using deductive coding. Subject terms for all citations were categorized and consolidated to identify major themes across the corpus of included publications. Results were analyzed using bibliometrics and thematic analysis. Findings: A total of 691 unique citations were included in this analysis based on inclusion criteria. Publication productivity has generally increased from 2011 to 2020; findings show publications from 170 source titles and 944 authors representing 33 countries. Prevalent themes included access to information, multiculturalism and social justice. Various populations groups, areas of LIS practice, library types and social justice topics have been addressed in the literature. Over 15% of citations focused on anti-racism efforts in LIS. Originality/value: This study applied both bibliometric and thematic approaches to analyzing LIS literature at macro and micro levels regarding anti-racism, equity, inclusion and social justice.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Jones, E. P., Mani, N. S., Carlson, R. B., Welker, C. G., Cawley, M., & Yu, F. (2022). Analysis of anti-racism, equity, inclusion and social justice initiatives in library and information science literature. Reference Services Review, 50(1), 81–101. https://doi.org/10.1108/RSR-07-2021-0032

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free