IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v121y2019i1d10.1007_s11192-019-03210-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of the share of documents and citations from different quartile journals in 25 research areas

Author

Listed:
  • Ruben Miranda

    () (Universidad Complutense de Madrid)

  • Esther Garcia-Carpintero

    (Instituto de Salud Carlos III)

Abstract

The total number of publications and/or the share of total publications in a given quartile, usually first quartile (Q1), is increasingly used in performance-based funding of public research. However, the quality significance of publishing in Q1 journals is very different depending on the research areas. Both the expected probability to publish in Q1 journals, given by the number of papers published in each quartile, as well as the average citations received by Q1 publications compared to other quartiles, is largely dependent on the research area. This study analyzes the share of articles published in each quartile in the 25 largest research areas indexed by Science Citation Index-Expanded (Web of Science) and their main citation characteristics aiming to enrich the discussion about journal-based evaluation systems and specifically the number and/or the share of publications in Q1. It was found that the average share of documents published in Q1 was 45.7% (38.4% for articles and reviews), varying from 25.4 to 85.6% (from 17.1 to 88.9% for articles and reviews) depending on the area. Q1 publications were cited, on average, 2.07 times more than Q2 publications (2.41 times for articles plus reviews), however, depending on the area, this ratio varied from 0.9 to 6.1 (from 1.7 to 5.4 times for articles plus reviews). Q1 (total publications or articles plus reviews), received, on average, 65% of total citations of the research area, but again this value varied from 46 to 98% depending on the area.

Suggested Citation

  • Ruben Miranda & Esther Garcia-Carpintero, 2019. "Comparison of the share of documents and citations from different quartile journals in 25 research areas," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(1), pages 479-501, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:121:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-019-03210-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-019-03210-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-019-03210-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Miranda, Ruben & Garcia-Carpintero, Esther, 2018. "Overcitation and overrepresentation of review papers in the most cited papers," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 1015-1030.
    2. Sugimoto, Cassidy R. & Larivière, Vincent & Ni, Chaoqun & Cronin, Blaise, 2013. "Journal acceptance rates: A cross-disciplinary analysis of variability and relationships with journal measures," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 897-906.
    3. Bornmann, Lutz & Williams, Richard, 2017. "Can the journal impact factor be used as a criterion for the selection of junior researchers? A large-scale empirical study based on ResearcherID data," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 788-799.
    4. George A. Lozano & Vincent Larivière & Yves Gingras, 2012. "The weakening relationship between the impact factor and papers' citations in the digital age," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(11), pages 2140-2145, November.
    5. Lutz Bornmann & Werner Marx, 2014. "How to evaluate individual researchers working in the natural and life sciences meaningfully? A proposal of methods based on percentiles of citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(1), pages 487-509, January.
    6. Juan Miguel Campanario & William Cabos, 2014. "The effect of additional citations in the stability of Journal Citation Report categories," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(2), pages 1113-1130, February.
    7. Alfonso Ibáñez & Concha Bielza & Pedro Larrañaga, 2013. "Relationship among research collaboration, number of documents and number of citations: a case study in Spanish computer science production in 2000–2009," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(2), pages 689-716, May.
    8. George A. Lozano & Vincent Larivière & Yves Gingras, 2012. "The weakening relationship between the impact factor and papers' citations in the digital age," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(11), pages 2140-2145, November.
    9. J. A. García & Rosa Rodriguez-Sánchez & J. Fdez-Valdivia & J. Martinez-Baena, 2012. "On first quartile journals which are not of highest impact," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(3), pages 925-943, March.
    10. Brito, Ricardo & Rodríguez-Navarro, Alonso, 2019. "Evaluating research and researchers by the journal impact factor: Is it better than coin flipping?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 314-324.
    11. Weishu Liu & Guangyuan Hu & Mengdi Gu, 2016. "The probability of publishing in first-quartile journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(3), pages 1273-1276, March.
    12. Liang, Liming & Zhong, Zhen & Rousseau, Ronald, 2015. "Uncited papers, uncited authors and uncited topics: A case study in library and information science," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 50-58.
    13. Lutz Bornmann & Felix de Moya Anegón & Rüdiger Mutz, 2013. "Do Universities or Research Institutions With a Specific Subject Profile Have an Advantage or a Disadvantage in Institutional Rankings? A Latent Class Analysis With Data From the SCImago Ranking," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(11), pages 2310-2316, November.
    14. Huang, Ding-wei, 2016. "Positive correlation between quality and quantity in academic journals," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 329-335.
    15. Zaida Chinchilla-Rodríguez & Grisel Zacca-González & Benjamín Vargas-Quesada & Félix Moya-Anegón, 2016. "Benchmarking scientific performance by decomposing leadership of Cuban and Latin American institutions in Public Health," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(3), pages 1239-1264, March.
    16. Waltman, Ludo, 2016. "A review of the literature on citation impact indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 365-391.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yaşar Tonta & Müge Akbulut, 2020. "Does monetary support increase citation impact of scholarly papers?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(2), pages 1617-1641, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:121:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-019-03210-z. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sonal Shukla) or (Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.