Search

The Science Citation Index, Journal Citation Reports (JCR), published by the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) and designed to rank, evaluate, categorize and compare journals, is used in a wide scientific context as a tool for evaluating researchers and research work, through the use of just one of its indicators, the impact factor. With the aim of obtaining an overall and synthetic perspective of impact factor values, we studied the frequency distributions of this indicator using the box-plot method. Using this method we divided the journals listed in the JCR into five groups (low, lower central, upper central, high and extreme). These groups position the journal in relation to its competitors. Thus, the group designated as extreme contains the journals with high impact factors which are deemed to be prestigious by the scientific community. We used the JCR data from 1996 to determine these groups, firstly for all subject categories combined (all 4779 journals) and then for each of the 183 ISI subject categories. We then substituted the indicator value for each journal by the name of the group in which it was classified. The journal group may differ from one subject category to another. In this article, we present a guide for evaluating journals constructed as described above. It provides a comprehensive and synthetic view of two of the most used sections of the JCR. It makes it possible to make more accurate and complete judgements on and through the journals, and avoids an oversimplified view of the complex reality of the world of journals. It immediately reveals the scientific subject category where the journal is best positioned. Also, whereas it used to be difficult to make intra- and interdisciplinary comparisons, this is now possible without having to consult the different sections of the JCR. We construct this guide each year using indicators published in the JCR by the ISI.

In this paper, we analysed six indicators of the SCI Journal Citation Reports (JCR) over a 19-year period: number of total citations, number of citations to the two previous years, number of source items, impact factor, immediacy index and cited half-life. The JCR seems to have become more or less an authority for evaluating scientific and technical journals, essentially through its impact factor. However it is difficult to find one's way about in the impressive mass of quantitative data that JCR provides each year. We proposed the box plot method to aggregate the values of each indicator so as to obtain, at a glance, portrayals of the JCR population from 1974 to 1993. These images reflected the distribution of the journals into 4 groups designated low, central, high and extreme. The limits of the groups became a reference system with which, for example, it was rapidly possible to situate visually a given journal within the overall JCR population. Moreover, the box plot method, which gives a zoom effect, made it possible to visualize a large sub-population of the JCR usually overshadowed by the journals at the top of the rankings. These top level journals implicitly play the role of reference in evaluation processes. This often incites categorical judgements when the journals to be evaluated are not part of the top level. Our «rereading» of the JCR, which presented the JCR product differently, made it possible to qualify these judgements and bring a new light on journals.