How are journal impact, prestige and article influence related? An application to neuroscience
The paper analyzes the leading journals in neurosciences using quantifiable research assessment measures (RAM), highlights the similarities and differences in alternative RAM, shows that several RAM capture similar performance characteristics of highly cited journals, and shows that some other RAM have low correlations with each other, and hence add significant informational value. Alternative RAM are discussed for the Thomson Reuters ISI Web of Science database (hereafter ISI). The RAM that are calculated annually or updated daily include the classic 2-year impact factor (2YIF), 5-year impact factor, immediacy (or zero-year impact factor), Eigenfactor score, article influence score, C3PO (citation performance per paper online), h-index, Zinfluence, PI-BETA (papers ignored by even the authors), 2-year and historical self-citation threshold approval ratings, impact factor inflation, and cited article influence (CAI). The RAM are analyzed for 26 highly cited journals in the ISI category of neurosciences. The paper finds that the Eigenfactor score and PI-BETA are not highly correlated with the other RAM scores, so that they convey additional information regarding journal rankings, that article influence is highly correlated with some existing RAM, so that it has little informative incremental value, and that CAI has additional informational value to that of article influence. Harmonic mean rankings of the 13 RAM criteria for the 26 highly cited journals are also presented. Emphasizing the 2YIF of a journal to the exclusion of other informative RAM criteria is shown to lead to a distorted evaluation of journal performance and influence, especially given the informative value of several other RAM.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 38 (2011)
Issue (Month): 11 (January)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/CJAS20|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/CJAS20|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Chia-Lin Chang & Michael McAleer & Les Oxley, 2011.
"Great Expectatrics: Great Papers, Great Journals, Great Econometrics,"
Documentos de Trabajo del ICAE
2011-14, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Instituto Complutense de Análisis Económico.
- Chia-Lin Chang & Michael McAleer & Les Oxley, 2011. "Great Expectatrics: Great Papers, Great Journals, Great Econometrics," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(6), pages 583-619.
- Chia-Lin Chang & Michael McAleer & Les Oxley, 2010. "Great Expectatrics: Great Papers, Great Journals, Great Econometrics," Working Papers in Economics 10/36, University of Canterbury, Department of Economics and Finance.
- Chia-Lin Chang & Michael McAleer & Les Oxley, 2010. "Great Expectatrics: Great Papers, Great Journals, Great Econometrics," KIER Working Papers 714, Kyoto University, Institute of Economic Research.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:japsta:v:38:y:2011:i:11:p:2563-2573. 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: (Michael McNulty)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.