Search

The focus of this work is to examine the relationship between subjective and objective measures of prestige of journals in our field. Findings indicate that items pulled from Clarivate, Elsevier, and Google all have statistically significant elements related to perceived journal prestige. Just as several widely used bibliometric metrics related to prestige, so were altmetric scores. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examined perceived journal quality by physical education pedagogy faculty members. Participants (N = 273) were identified in three ways and recruited through e-mail. Based on research in other fields investigating journal quality and on publication patterns in physical education, a web-based survey was used to examine (a) whether participants knew a journal and viewed it as scholarly, (b) ratings of journal quality, (c) what factors influenced their ratings, and (d) demographic and scholarly productivity measures. There was a wide range of journals known by the participants and clear indicators of which journals had higher and lower perceived quality. There were differences in ratings between those employed at master's and doctoral institutions and relationships between scholarly productivity and the number of journals known. The results provide strong indications of journal quality for those who have reasons to evaluate journals in physical education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are many factors affecting review duration after a paper has been submitted to a journal. Developing a time-to-acceptance model of each journal for the whole time span from submission to acceptance can help researchers when they are selecting journals to publish research results, as well as help editors when they are optimizing workflow and strategy. Using ISI-indexed journals in the profession of library and information science as an example, this study aims to explore the possible patterns of time-to-acceptance for refereed articles. Based on the theories of maximum likelihood estimation, this article models probability distributions for the retrieved data through the R package fitdistrplus. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test is further used to determine if the distribution for each journal can be accepted.

The article discusses the use of metrics by academic librarians to assess the publication impact of practicing academic librarians. Metrics focusing on the prestige of library and information science journals, citation analysis, and citation counts are explored. The divide between research and practice in library science is examined and particular focus is given to the scholarly impact of research and publications contributed by practicing librarians. Limitations of impact factor assessments and the scholarly output of practicing librarians compared to library and information science faculty are also explored.

This paper highlights the quantitative performance of scholarly LIS research in Asian countries based on articles published during 2001-2007 in journals indexed by the Social Science Citation Index of Web of Knowledge. The quantitative performance of Asian countries has been judged and compared on the basis of various quantitative indicators: (a) size of scientific activity measured by volume of production in various types of publications during the period of study, (b) authorship pattern and collaboration of scientific activity measured by co-authorship and the amount of national and international collaboration, (c) the pattern of citations measured by counting the cited and citing references of published articles, and (d) a newly developed metrics-research performance. The results show that during the last seven years, the publication rate has increased twofold and, among the Asian countries, the authors of the People's Republic of China contributed the greatest number of articles, followed by Taiwan and South Korea. There is also an increasing trend toward collaborative research among Asian authors, with most of the collaboration occurring either among authors from the same country or with authors of non-Asian origin. The research performance analysis indicates that articles written by authors from South Korea received the highest number of citations, followed by Taiwan. Although the quantity of articles published by authors of Taiwan and South Korea is higher than Singapore and Israel, the articles contributed by authors from these latter two blocks appear in higher-impact journals. These findings show the increasing contribution made by Asian scholars to the international LIS literature, and the quality of that research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The aim of this study is to compare the growth of research published in following six e-journals published from Pakistan during the period of 2006-2015. 1). Journal Surgery of Pakistan, 2). Pakistan Journal of Medical Research, 3). Pakistan Pediatric Journal, 4). Pakistan Journal of Ophthalmology, 5). Pakistan Heart Journal and 6). Journal of Liaquat University of Medical & Health Sciences. Methodology: The data of published items of all targeted six Pakistani medical journals were downloaded from their respective websites and saved the required information in Microsoft Excel Sheet during January to May 2018 for statistical analysis. Number of published items, authors, gender-wise segregation of authors and authorship pattern were calculated. Results: Total 2133 research items published in 230 issues of six e-journals during 2006-2015 with an average of 9.27 articles per issue, 7949 authors contributed their research with an average of 3.72 authors per papers. Gender-wise distribution of authors showed that majority of authors (n=6022; 75.7%) were male while female authors counted 1921 (24.1%). Gender-wise distribution of first author revealed that the share of female authors were 28.2%. Bulk of research (n=1951; 91.4%) were produced by collaborative efforts. Conclusion: It is concluded that surgery and allied specialties is the preferred area of research and there is need to conduct more research on cardiology. Most of the papers were written in collaborative efforts and three authors pattern was found most favorite. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Cheung Kong Scholars Program has become a nationally important, high-level talent plan. In this study, we determined whether the research output and coauthorship pattern of Cheung Kong Scholars changed after their receipt of the award. We selected the 83 recipients of the 2005 Cheung Kong Scholars Award and identified a total of 11,522 Science/Social Sciences Citation Index papers published between 1996 and 2015 by these awardees. The analysis was divided into two 10-year periods—the preaward (1996–2005) and postaward (2006–15) periods—to investigate changes in the scholars' research performance. The results revealed that the number of papers authored by each Cheung Kong Scholar increased significantly, and there were also significant increases between the two periods in terms of average citation count and journal impact factor, suggesting that the quality of the scholars' papers improved in tandem with the quantity. Second, a quadrant chart revealed that individuals exhibited different trends in productivity and impact, but their impacts' distribution in the postaward period was much more concentrated than that in the preaward period. Third, the scholars' coauthorship patterns changed significantly after receiving the award—not only their number of coauthors per paper significantly increased but also their authorship role changed significantly. In both number and proportion, they became less likely to act as the first author, but more likely to be listed as the last author. Furthermore, they published more papers as corresponding author, and more papers as the first, corresponding, or last author, though their proportion did not change significantly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Very little research has been conducted to investigate new journal impact factors that have emerged to rank open access (OA) journals as an alternative to the Journal Citation Reports and SCImago Journal & Country Rank. The few existing studies have found these metrics misleading. Our study examined the criteria used by these impact factors to see whether they are fake metrics or represent early efforts for developing new standards to advance journal evaluations. We analysed as many available alternative impact factors as possible and discovered that their methodologies were either unreproducible or based on unreliable or opaque criteria. We hope this study will help shed light on the ecosystem of OA publishing and identify both possibly unprofessional behaviours and potential improvements in bibliometric algorithms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of the study is to determine the views of the instructors about the experiences they have during the international publishing in terms of academic productivity. The study aims to reveal the problems the instructors experience during the publication process in international journal indexes and in the journals like SSCI, SCI and AHCI and to determine the needs of the instructors in order them to succeed in this process. In the study, one of the qualitative methods, phenomenological research design was used. The study group consists of 15 instructors determined by criterion sampling within the purposive sampling methods. The basic criterion in determining the study group is that the instructors should complete the doctoral degree in Turkey in the last 10 years or abroad and they should have international publications. The data of the study were collected with semi-structured interview forms. based on the sub-problems of the study and the interviews with the instructors, the following issues were discussed about: the purposes of the instructors in overseas publishing, their experiences in international publishing, the factors motivating themselves for international publishing, if there is, the reason why they didn't want to publish in foreign countries and somehow the reason why they didn't want to publish in the journals in the country, the difficulties they encountered with during the process of international publishing, the strategies they followed during the publication and their recommendations for the researches who wish to make publishing abroad. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Española de Documentación Científica is the property of Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The 2015-2016 epidemic in the Americas caused by the Zika Virus (ZIKV) triggered a dramatic increase in the number of scholarly publications on this topic. In an effort to understand and characterize this body of literature, a bibliometric study was conducted on all articles found in PubMed that were published on ZIKV between 1952 and 2016. Study parameters included publication date, source journal, subject and category of source journal, and country of first author. The data was frequency-ranked, enabling identification of the most highly productive journal titles, subject areas, and countries. The study concluded with a comparison between the number of opinion pieces versus research articles published on ZIKV and five other emerging infectious diseases. Results of the study will be of interest to students, researchers, and librarians and information science professionals, and will serve as a baseline for subsequent analyses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In many fields of science, 'impact factors' are assigned to articles, authors and magazines as a matter of routine. Databases containing abstracts and citations of scientific publications are available to facilitate this. However, in the Netherlands this is not the case for publications in the field of Law. For several reasons, these publications are not generally 'ranked' according to their importance and/or 'impact' and citations from these publications are not compiled and/or processed systematically. The need to change this situation is generally felt. One reason is that important publications can be more easily found in the ever increasing amount of digital data available to researchers when information relating to their impact is available. Another reason is that universities and research institutes need tools to assess the work of their employees. But the construction of a legal citation index from scratch is no small task. The project described in this paper aims at contributing to a more effective impact measurement of Dutch legal publications - for instance, articles in journals - by facilitating the automatic collection of citation data from publications. This is accomplished by making use of so-called content integration technology. Using the collected citation data, it is possible to assess the 'impact' of the publications involved much more reliably. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Bibliometric assessment of journal literature helps the policy makers to formulate policies regarding the related subject and to know the latest trends of publications. The pharmaceutical sciences are combination of various academics fields and technologies of pharmaceutical products related to design, action, delivery and nature of drugs. The aim of this study is to evaluate the research productivity of Pakistan Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences (PJPS). Research Methods: This is retrospective study on research items published in PJPS during 1998 - 2012 carried out at Libraries of King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Saudi Arabia during March to September 2017. The data was collected from the website of respective journal. Spreadsheet of Microsoft Excel was prepared for statistical analysis Results: PJPS published 722 articles contributed by 2504 authors with an average of 4.06 authors per article during the years 1998 - 2012. Male authors (67%) were dominated in writing research items. Majority of articles (97%) were written by multi-authors, single author share was very small (3%). Pharmacognosy found to be the most preferred area of research. The contribution from the researchers of 32 countries produced 329 (45.5%) articles revealed that the journal has international recognition. Conclusion: PJPS creates a credible place for imparting the knowledge of pharmaceutical sciences research from all around the world, providing a platform to scientists and researchers to share their information to another one for saving a life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this article is to offer an overview of studies related to job performance, presenting the results of a bibliometric review of empirical studies appearing in the principal journals of management and psychology (according to the Journal Citation Reports [JCR] index) in the period 2006–2015. We want to understand how researchers are studying job performance (e.g., which methods are employed, which variables relate to performance, and how the construct has been defined). This review is particularly relevant given that there is an absence of reviews during the past 10 years. In addition, the adoption of management, applied psychology, and business journals is justified because they are areas that traditionally publish articles on organizational behavior, the field of study into which the variable job performance is inserted. Our study analyzed 175 articles that investigated the theme job performance. The results showed the importance of performance in organizational studies, especially in understanding which factors (or variables) contribute to an increase in job performance. Therefore, it is recommended that more research be conducted to further develop this field of study, with our research being a step toward comprehending the job performance construct. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Przeglad Elektrotechniczny is the property of Przeglad Elektrotechniczny and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

We explore the consistency of a new type of frequency distribution, where the corresponding rank distribution is Lavalette distribution. Empirical data of journal impact factors can be well described. This distribution is distinct from Poisson distribution and negative binomial distribution, which were suggested by previous study. By a log transformation, we obtain a bell-shaped distribution, which is then compared to Gaussian and catenary curves. Possible mechanisms behind the shape of impact factor distribution are suggested. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Legal scholarly journals are primarily written to influence those who read their content. Their influence is usually measured by counting the number of citations made of them in the subsequent articles and judicial publications. This study measured the impact of South African legal journals' content, by counting the number of times these journals have been cited and mentioned in subsequent legal journal articles and judicial decisions (judgements) through the use of Google Scholar (GS) citations and Butterworth Lexis Nexis database respectively. The results of the study revealed variations in terms of the citation patterns of legal journals in legal scholarship and judicial rulings. The most heavily cited journals in South Africa are relatively new and disseminated through the open access mode, while journals which are highly cited by judges in judicial decisions or law reports appear to be those that have been in existence for a long time. Further research on the most influential legal journal articles and authors could perhaps improve the chances of South African legal journals being internationally recognised. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Fuzzy decision-making consists in making decisions under complex and uncertain environments where the information can be assessed with fuzzy sets and systems. The aim of this study is to review the main contributions in this field by using a bibliometric approach. For doing so, the article uses a wide range of bibliometric indicators including the citations and the h-index. Moreover, it also uses the VOS viewer software in order to map the main trends in this area. The work considers the leading journals, articles, authors and institutions. The results indicate that the USA was the traditional leader in this field with the most significant researcher. However, during the last years, this field is receiving more attention by Asian authors that are starting to lead the field. This discipline has a strong potential and the expectations for the future is that it will continue to grow. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We identify two orthogonal journal performance indicators from the points of view of size-dependence and principal component analysis using graph-theoretic constructs from social network analysis. One, the power--weakness ratio is a size-independent recursive proxy for the quality of the journal's performance in the network. The second, the number of references (out-links) that the journal makes to all journals in the network is the size-dependent proxy for the size of the journal (a quantity metric). In an input--output sense, the number of references becomes the measure of the input and the number of citations received by the journal from all journals in the network becomes the size-dependent measure of the output. The power--weakness ratio of citations to references before recursive iteration becomes the non-network measure of popularity and the power--weakness ratio of weighted citations and weighted references after recursive iteration becomes the network measure of prestige of the journal. It is also possible to propose first-order and second-order measures of influence which are products of the quality and quantity parameter space. We also show that the influence weight that emerges from a Pinski--Narin or Google PageRank formulation is a size-dependent measure of prestige that is orthogonal to the power--weakness ratio. We illustrate the concepts using two simple artificial two- and three-journal networks and a real-life example of a subgraph of 10 well-known statistical journals with network data collected from the Web of Science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite their recognized limitations, bibliometric assessments of scientific productivity have been widely adopted. We describe here an improved method to quantify the influence of a research article by making novel use of its co-citation network to field-normalize the number of citations it has received. Article citation rates are divided by an expected citation rate that is derived from performance of articles in the same field and benchmarked to a peer comparison group. The resulting Relative Citation Ratio is article level and field independent and provides an alternative to the invalid practice of using journal impact factors to identify influential papers. To illustrate one application of our method, we analyzed 88,835 articles published between 2003 and 2010 and found that the National Institutes of Health awardees who authored those papers occupy relatively stable positions of influence across all disciplines. We demonstrate that the values generated by this method strongly correlate with the opinions of subject matter experts in biomedical research and suggest that the same approach should be generally applicable to articles published in all areas of science. A beta version of iCite, our web tool for calculating Relative Citation Ratios of articles listed in PubMed, is available at . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author reflects on Impact Factor (IF) of academic journals that continues to gain importance with not only science community but also academic institutions, funding agencies as well as the Editors of academic journals the world. The author notes that IF is still considered the best Scientometrics to judge the standard of an academic journal. The increasing importance of Impact Factor is evident from the fact that many publishers and Editors who fail to get indexed by Web of Sciences.

A study which evaluated critical care research in the Eastern Mediterranean Region (EMR) is presented. Topics covered include number of publications in the EMR countries, description of the research fields and patient populations in EMR countries, and necessity of investment in health research in EMR countries in line with low research output in the region.

Publishers, librarians, funders and researchers are faced with the task of evaluating academic journals. Journals have often been ranked using misapplied metrics or through a single indicator used without appropriate context. The latter usage is controversial as a single indicator only measures one aspect of journal performance and is subject to interpretation. For a more meaningful analysis, a range of different measures should be used, combining both productivity (such as document and citation counts) and also normalized values for wider comparisons and contextualization. Analyses at the journal level should consider the impact of individual published articles. As citation-based measures look at a single aspect of article performance, a more thorough analysis should include a wider set of quantitative and qualitative measures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose – Although journal rankings are important for authors, readers, publishers, promotion, and tenure committees, it has been argued that the use of different measures (e.g. the journal impact factor (JIF), and Hirsch’s h-index) often lead to different journal rankings, which render it difficult to make an appropriate decision. A hybrid ranking method based on the Borda count approach, the Standardized Average Index (SA index), was introduced to solve this problem. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach – Citations received by the articles published in 85 Health Care Sciences and Services (HCSS) journals in the period of 2009-2013 were analyzed with the use of the JIF, the h-index, and the SA index. Findings – The SA index exhibits a high correlation with the JIF and the h-index (γ > 0.9, p < 0.01) and yields results with higher accuracy than the h-index. The new, comprehensive citation impact analysis of the 85 HCSS journals shows that the SA index can help researchers to find journals with both high JIFs and high h-indices more easily, thereby harvesting references for paper submissions and research directions. Originality/value – The contribution of this study is the application of the Borda count approach to combine the HCSS journal rankings produced by the two widely accepted indices of the JIF and the h-index. The new HCSS journal rankings can be used by publishers, journal editors, researchers, policymakers, librarians, and practitioners as a reference for journal selection and the establishment of decisions and professional judgment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author reflects on the measurement of the impact factor (IF) of a journal to assess its quality. He mentions the issues of concern regarding the impact factor in the way authors are encouraged to submit papers to high IF journals and the period in which the journal IF is assessed. He emphasizes that as the perceived importance of the IF rises, concerns over its use and objectivity also grow. He also stresses the need to have a debate about the future of the journal IF.

Background: Publication of scientific articles related to khat (Catha edulis) in peer-reviewed journals is considered a measure of research productivity. The principal objectives of this study were to quantify the research contribution related to khat at the global level, as well as to determine its relative growth rate, collaborative measures taken, productivity at the institutional level, and the most prolific journals publishing on the topic. Methods: On the basis of title words related to khat, publications were identified for all data in Scopus bibliographic database's history up to December 31, 2014. The research productivity for the top 10 countries was evaluated in relation to the population size and gross domestic product (GDP) in 2013. Results: The criteria were met by 651 documents published in 51 countries. The largest number of articles associated with khat was from the UK (15.2 %), followed by Yemen (10.3 %), the USA (9.7 %) and Ethiopia (9.1 %). Ethiopia, Yemen, and Kenya had the highest productivity of publications after standardization by population size and GDP. Furthermore, Yemen achieved the highest number of collaborations, by having researchers from 19 countries. Ethiopia followed, having researchers from 16 countries. Conclusions: This bibliometric study provides a demonstration for the worldwide research activity regarding khat. The number of articles related to khat has increased rapidly over the last 10 years. The present study is a good starting point to evaluate research activity in the field of khat. Although the data shows a promising increase in the research activity, the quantity of khat-related research is still too little compared to the massive use of khat in certain countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this study was to measure the publication rate of editorial board members in their board journals and to evaluate associated variables. We evaluated the ten highest-ranked journals according to the 5-year impact factor under 'Dentistry, Oral Surgery & Medicine' subject category for 2010, 2011, and 2012. All original research papers with at least one member of the editorial board as author were counted. Final analyses assessed associated variables such as size of the editorial board, number of papers published each year, and each journal's impact factor. Overall, there was an increase in the average number of articles published from 2010 (115.2 ± 52.2) to 2012 (134.7 ± 47.4). The number and percentage of articles published with editorial board members as authors over the three years did not follow the same pattern, with a slight decrease from 2010 to 2011 and an increase in 2012. The number of articles with editorial board members as authors was significantly higher for journals with impact factors =4.0. Journals with a higher impact factor and larger editorial board were associated with higher chances of editorial board members publishing in their respective journals. Participation of editorial board members as authors in publishing varies significantly among journals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The uses and misuses of the Journal Impact Factor (JIF) have been thoroughly discussed in the literature. A few years ago, I predicted that JIF would soon be replaced, while another colleague argued the opposite. Over the past few months, attacks on JIF have intensified, with some publishing organizations gradually removing the indicator from their journals' websites. Here, I argue that most, if not all of the misuses of JIF are related to its name. The word "impact" should be removed, since it implies an influential attribute, either for the journals, their published papers, or their authors. I propose instead the use of a new name, the "CAPCI factor", standing for Citation Average Per Citable Item, which accurately describes what is represented by this measure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A bibliometric approach was employed to analyze the research productivity and performance of creativity studies between 1965 and 2012. A dataset was constructed using all publications and citations retrieved from four key journals that publish creativity research:Journal of Creative Behavior(JCB),Gifted Child Quarterly(GCQ),Creativity Research Journal(CRJ), andPsychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts(PACA). Major findings in this study include: (a) During the study period, the four journals have published 1,891 articles on creativity and they have been cited 11,709 times; (b) the impact factors of the four journals increased from lower than .50 in 2002 to over 1.0 in 2012; in 2012PACAhad the highest impact factor, followed byCRJ; (c)JCBpublished the most creativity papers andCRJhad the most citations; (d) about a third of the articles published in the four journals have never been cited. Implications for the field of creativity are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper proposes the application of the three main Bibliometrics laws -Lotka, Zipf, and Bradford- to address the following questions: (i) How to be sure of the quality of publishers and contents in scholarly publishing, and (ii) How to determine content reliability. Our main goal is to evaluate the visibility of Transinformação, a Brazilian scholarly journal in the information science area, according to its productivity, citation counts, and performance indicators. This study focusses on the concepts of Bibliometrics and Scholarly Journals, presenting a brief history of scholarly publishing and its accessibility in Brazil, as well as the software tools used in this work. This is an exploratory documentary study, based on descriptive mixed methods (i.e., both qualitative and quantitative), that analyzes 24 years of Transinformação issues, from its first edition in 1989 to 2011. Descriptive statistics tables are used to show the results obtained from analyses carried out with Publish or perish, Microsoft Excel, and Web of science Citespace tools. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Submissions to the Journal continue to increase strongly (up 35% since last year), with a strong international pattern, while our response times are also improving. The JAE's citation impact factor declined slightly in 2012 from the record high in 2011 (1.55) to 1.5. However, current data on 2013 citations imply a significant decline in 2013 (due to be published in June 2014). Wiley-Blackwell continue to provide a strong publishing platform with our full archive generating rapidly increasing numbers of downloads. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sambalpur Univesity (SU) was started functioning from 1st January, 1967 in the Odisha State. The university imparting study and research through 27 post-graduate departments in disciplines of Science, Humanities, Business Administration, Social Sciences, Law and Commerce. The present study aims to study the research performance of SU's publications that have been indexed in Scopus during 2008 to 2012. The study also identifies the annual growth of university publication, authorship pattern, author productivity, degree of collaboration, length of paper published, most prolific contributor, prolific institution/organization, geographical distribution etc. Lotka's law of scientific productivity was used to determine the author's productivity and Bradford's is law used to determine scattering of literature in the publication pattern of the university during the period under study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

DESIDOC Journal of Library and Information Technology (DJLIT) is more than three decades old journal, published in the field of library and information Sciences, on bimonthly basis, by Defense Science Documentation Centre, New Delhi, India. The journal is enjoying wide readership both at national and international level. The present Bibliometric study was carried on 366 scholarly research articles published in 'DESIDOC Journal of Library and Information Technology, during the period 2003-2012. Present analysis is mostly confined to examine article distribution pattern of the journal articles, authorship pattern, geographical distribution of authors and citation analysis. A maximum of 147 articles contributed in the journal are on two author pattern, followed by 139 articles as single author. New Delhi since being the host state of the journal emerged the single largest contributing state with 199 out of 627 contributors from India. On average 6.20 articles were published by the journal in each issue during the period of investigation with total references 5063, thereby making average 13.83 references each article. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose- The study aims to quantify the scientific productivity of Physicists using Scientometric h-index and g-index indicators. Paper also identifies that h and g are complementary to each other and g ≥h (1.5 times of h). The most productive and highly cited physicists and their average citation per item at JNU are identified. Also the study enlists the best ten high impact papers published during 2007-2011. Questionnaire was used to know research papers published (2007-2011) by the physicists at JNU. These papers were cross checked for originality, accuracy and completeness from web of science, Scopus, and by visiting journals online. Quantification of scientific productivity of physicists states that Satyabrata Patnaik occupies best three ranks in all categories which make him the high impact and most cited author among others. There is a variation in rankings according to different order h, g and g/h. The study helps to know the research trends of past and present scientific activities of Physicists at JNU. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In view to measure the scientific temper of publication output and to examine the citation pattern in the area of social sciences, 1000 papers drawn from Science Direct Database from the period 2006-2010 for the present piece of study is experienced. In order to serve this purpose the focus has been centered on the analysis of trend of publications, citation and ranking patterns, and global publication profiles in the faculty of the study, and extensively, an attempt has been made to explore the strengths and weakness of different productive countries, affiliated organizations, and the most productive researchers, considering the quantum of their respective research publications. The core findings indicate that, the momentum in quantum of publication output and the participation of number of researchers in research and development has already been accelerated generally in social sciences, specifically, in Political Science at a vertical direction. USA has been proved as a most productive country with 52.6 and 44.8 per cent papers among 27 and 24 participative countries in both journals such as: 'CPCS' and 'ES'. Besides, the period 2006-2010 has identified as one of the most productive time zones having highest 62.8 and 57.5 percent papers contribution to each journal respectively. Additionally, it is noticed that, the single author publications are dominant in 1st journal 'CPCS', while a highest number of papers in 2nd journal 'ES' are found to be co-authored which is dominating over single authorship pattern. Nevertheless, the most participative institutions in publication in both journals are significantly representing to the highly productive country 'USA' is graced to be worthiest, as the study unfolds. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The journal Ecology is one of the premier journals in the field of ecology, published by the Ecological Society of America. Ten volumes of the journal containing 120 issues from 2003 to 2012 have been taken into consideration for the present study that carries out a bibliometric analysis of the 3,359 papers and 164,369 references of this journal. The analysis covers parameters like growth pattern, authorship pattern and author productivity, with most productive countries and institutions. Out of 3,359 contributions, only 410 were single-authored and the rest were multi-authored with a Collaboration Coefficient of 0.21. Applicability of Lotka's Law has been tested. The most productive institution was the University of California at Davis, with 183 publications. The United States of America topped the list of countries with 2,188 papers, while South Africa occupied eighteenth position. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Information systems journal rankings and ratings help scholars focus their publishing efforts and are widely used surrogates for judging the quality of research. Over the years, numerous approaches have been used to rank IS journals, approaches such as citation metrics, school lists, acceptance rates, and expert assessments. However, the results of these approaches often conflict due to a host of validity concerns. In the current scientometric study, we make significant strides toward correcting for these limitations in the ranking of mainstream IS journals. We compare expert rankings to bibliometric measures such as the ISI Impact Factor™, the h-index, and social network analysis metrics. Among other findings, we conclude that bibliometric measures provide very similar results to expert-based methods in determining a tiered structure of IS journals, thereby suggesting that bibliometrics can be a complete, less expensive, and more efficient substitute for expert assessment. We also find strong support for seven of the eight journals in the Association for Information Systems Senior Scholars' "basket" of journals. A cluster analysis of our results indicates a two-tiered separation in the quality of the highest quality IS journals-with MIS Quarterly, Information Systems Research, and Journal of Management Information Systems belonging, in that order, to the highest A+ tier. Journal quality metrics fit nicely into the sociology of science literature and can be useful in models that attempt to explain how knowledge disseminates through scientific communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Citations to published scientific articles are regularly collected and processed, bringing about the impact factor and a large number of other bibliometric indicators. We interpret the set of citations collected during fixed period as a characteristic statistical distribution of citations, argue about its properties and conjecture what statistical measures represent reliably such distributions. In that way we try to contribute to determining precisely the scope and level of suitability of impact factor if accompanied with a small set of additional indicators, all derived solely from the distribution function. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Our study (in the area of sociology of science) examines how cosmopolitanism in three spheres of scientific engagement -- networking, collaborating, and conferencing -- influences total journal productivity (TOTAL) and productivity in high impact journals (HIJ; impact factor ⩾ 4). We hypothesize that scientists who exhibit cosmopolitanism in these spheres of scientific engagement have higher HIJ and TOTAL publication counts. To test this hypothesis, we conducted face-to-face interviews with a sample of n=84 life scientists in doctoral granting institutions in Japan, Singapore, and Taiwan. We analyzed our data using a set of generalized linear models (i.e., an over-dispersed Poisson regression for HIJ and a negative binomial regression for TOTAL) with publication counts as the outcome variables, and measures of professional networking, research collaboration, and scientific conferencing as our main predictor variables. To increase the precision of our regression estimates, we incorporated variables pertaining to contextual and personal attributes as multivari ate statistical controls. Our results indicate a positive association between HIJ productivity and proportion of foreign contacts, and no association between productivity and collaborations involving foreign participants. Although conference attendance in general is linked with increased productivity (HIJ and TOTAL), conference attendance abroad is not. These findings appear to suggest that the formal collaborative research group with its instrumental ties may not be conducive to productivity, but the informal professional network with its affective ties may be conducive; and having a cosmopolitan professional network is a strong predictor of productivity in high quality outlets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

58 years after the creation of impact factor (IF) the professional public shows interest in IFs and their significance for academia and individuals. Really, is a medical journal with IF needed for Macedonia? Some other small and developing countries have pursued and accomplished this goal: Serbia, Slovenia, and Croatia. On the other hand the survey of publications in Macedonian medical journals has been found to lack quality. We believe that to strive to obtain an IF would be beneficial for all Macedonian interest groups involved. This would introduce an ambition among the members of Macedonian academia to publish (so far rare), than to publish in Pubmed listed journals (ambition present in very few Macedonian academics) and then to publish in journals with the highest IF possible (so far a very exclusive group of Macedonian medical professionals). In time this will help in creating and enforcing legal obligation for the academia for a promotion based on merit of IF scientific publications. We believe that this is possible only by Parliament legislation. This will be of benefit for Macedonian patients, the medical community and will unable this country to contribute to the universe of science. Lastly it would certainly be helpful in getting a Macedonian university in the prestigious first 500 Shangai list. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Highlights: [•] We provide a source normalization approach based on a variable target window. [•] We compare it with a traditional normalization approach based on a fixed target window. [•] Our maximum citation time window reduces the between-group variance in relation to the within-group variance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examine the nature and temporal trends of science journal publishing, and seek to explain why some journals have higher Journal Impact Factors (JIF) than others. The investigation has implications for how we assess the importance of scientific contributions. National Laboratories run by the U.S. Department of Energy, for example, compare JIF across disciplines, while some academic institutions look at JIF when evaluating publication records. Problematic to these policies are several results, which have long been known in the medical and biological sciences, and are shown here to apply to the Earth sciences as well. In particular, citations are distributed almost logarithmically in any given issue of a journal, and so JIFs say nothing about the actual number of citations acquired by any given paper. In the area of mineralogy and petrology, for example, 25% of articles in a typical issue will capture >50% of all citations that accrue to that issue. For some issues the asymmetry is greater; we use such citation asymmetry to develop a classification for journals as "super elite," "elite," "influential," and "minor." We also find that JIFs are inherently larger for large disciplines, in part because as the size of a discipline increases (as measured by total papers published), the top journals benefit to a greater extent than other journals. For this and other reasons, JIF cannot be compared across disciplines. A heretofore unknown and disconcerting result is the incredible growth in JIFs for commercially published journals compared to their society-published counterparts--a growth that coincides with the advent of electronic distribution models (e.g., bundling) that were instituted by commercial publishers at the beginning of the 21st century. Journals, which only a decade ago had similar JIFs, and were viewed as being scientifically equivalent, now have very different JIFs. These contrasts may nucleate feedback loops (as authors look to higher JIF journals in which to publish) that threaten the health of society-published journals. Our analysis however, shows that in spite of growing contrasts in JIF, many society-published journals still provide a greater value (JIF/cost) compared to their commercially published counterparts. While we acknowledge that citations and citation rates can be useful tools to compare scientific influence and importance, the results of this and other bibliometric studies cause us to conclude that in the evaluation of science and scientists, it is a grave error to substitute numerical values for human judgment. And if professional societies are to continue to play a significant role in science publication, it is incumbent upon scientists--now more than ever--to send their best works to society-published journals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose – There are a number of published studies that have ranked journals publishing research in information systems and related areas such as electronic commerce. Despite electronic government (eGov) research reaching a decade-old milestone, none of the existing research has attempted to explore and determine the quality of journals publishing research related to this multidisciplinary area. To fill this gap, the purpose of this paper is to present the findings from a pilot survey exploring the scholarly perceptions of academic journals publishing eGov research. Design/methodology/approach – A questionnaire-based pilot survey was employed as the method for conducting this research. The survey was conducted by employing an e-mail questionnaire which was designed as a Word file. In total, 31 usable responses were received and these provided the data presented in this paper. Findings – The findings in the form of scholarly perceptions of journals publishing eGov research from this pilot survey explored the quality of journals. This pilot survey also explored respondents' views on the following: whether the journals dedicated to eGov should be included in various journal rankings; and whether there is a need to have separate rankings for journals that publish eGov. Research limitations/implications – The generalization of findings is limited due to the small sample size as it was a pilot study. Hence, the findings should be treated as indicative rather than confirmatory of the quality of journals publishing eGov research. A larger survey needs to be conducted, in order to validate and generalize the findings reported in this submission. Practical implications – The findings would be helpful for eGov researchers in terms of determining potential outlets with appropriate quality for future publications, and for universities/institutions engaged in supporting research in this area by recognizing and promoting publication in high-quality outlets. The findings may also aid the decision making of those involved in maintaining journal rankings in reference to disciplines, in order to include dedicated eGov journals in such rankings. Originality/value – There has been no research conducted and published (as far as the author is aware) that explores and determines the quality of journals publishing eGov research, which this paper attempts to achieve. Therefore, the findings presented in this paper are timely, original, and relevant to the eGov scholarly community. Since this is the very first step towards determining journal quality for publishing eGov research, the most important contribution of this paper would be to stimulate constructive debate amongst researchers of eGov (and its reference disciplines) on this topic, which (the author hopes) will then lead to the creation of rigorous consensus-based ranking of journals publishing eGov research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the author's reflection on the significance of the Impact Factor (bibliometric indicator) for defining the quality of scientific journals and for assessing the social appropriation of research knowledge. The author comments on alternative indicators used by open access bibliographic databases such as REDALYC (network of scientific journals from Latin América, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal) and SCIELO (Scientific Electronic Library Online).

This brief communications aims at sharing the list of impact factor journals of 'Statistics & Probability' as per the Journal Citation Report 2011 released by Institute of Scientific Information. This would update the academia and practitioner on their information about the ranking of the journals. The study makes country and regions wise comparisons of the changes in no of journals and their mean impact factors reported in the previous and current reports. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Worthiness of any scientific journal is measured by the quality of the articles published in it. The Impact factor (IF) is one popular tool which analyses the quality of journal in terms of citations received by its published articles. It is usually assumed that journals with high IF carry meaningful, prominent, and quality research. Since IF does not assess a single contribution but the whole journal, the evaluation of research authors should not be influenced by the IF of the journal. The h index, g index, m quotient, c index are some other alternatives to judge the quality of an author. These address the shortcomings of IF viz. number of citations received by an author, active years of publication, length of academic career and citations received for recent articles. Quality being the most desirable aspect for evaluating an author's work over the active research phase, various indices has attempted to accommodate different possible variables. However, each index has its own merits and demerits. We review the available indices, find the fallacies and to correct these, hereby propose the Original Research Performance Index (ORPI) for evaluation of an author's original work which can also take care of the bias arising because of self-citations, gift authorship, inactive phase of research, and length of non-productive period in research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors examine the relationship between the extent of inaccurate citation in published ecological literature and journal impact factor (IF). They cite the factors that contribute to the problem of poor citation practices including financial incentives for publishing houses. They describe the citations examined and judged. They also present the average accuracy calculated for a range of journals by IF.

The authors reflect on the Behavioral Sleep Medicine Committee, created by Dan Buysse, president of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine in 2010. The authors state that the committee is responsible for the definition of the domain, certification of practitioners, and accreditation of training programs. The authors suggest collaboration efforts for the continuing success of the journal "Behavioral Sleep Medicine." An overview of behavioral sleep medicine is also offered.

The article compares the significance of the article impact and journal impact factors. It is asserted that the publication of an article in a low-impact or not widely read journal is a more respectable achievement than the publication of an infrequently cited article in a high-impact or frequently read journal. An analysis of the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) impact factor of the "International Journal of Internet Science" is also presented.