The publication and citation impact profiles of angewandte chemie and the journal of the american chemical society based on the sections of chemical abstracts: A case study on the limitations of the journal impact factor

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology

Volumn 60, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 176-183

  Neuhaus, Christoph ^a   Marx, Werner ^b   Daniel, Hans Dieter ^c  

^a ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^b MAX PLANCK INSTITUT FÜR FESTKÖRPERFORSCHUNG   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

INFORMATION SERVICES;

AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY (ACS); CASE STUDIES; CHEMICAL ABSTRACTS; CITATION IMPACT; COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS; IMPACT FACTOR (IF); INTERNATIONAL (CO); RESEARCH FIELDS; REUTERS (CO); THOMSON (CO);

ABSTRACTING;

EID: 58449136394     PISSN: 15322882     EISSN: 15322890     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/asi.20960     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Angewandte Chemie. (2008). Guidelines for the preparation of manuscripts. Retrieved July 10, 2008, from http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/ joumal/26737/home/2002-guideline.html
2. Bornmann, L., Mutz, R., Neuhaus, C, & Daniel, H.-D. (2008). Citation counts for research evaluation: Standards of good practice for analyzing bibliometric data and presenting and interpreting results. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, 8(1), 93-102. Braam, R.R., & Bruil, J. (1992). Quality of indexing information: Authors' views on indexing of their articles in Chemical Abstracts online CA-file. Journal of Information Science, 18(5), 399-408.
3. Braun, T., & Glänzel, W. (1995). The sweet and sour of journal citation rates. On a source of error in computing impact factors. The Chemical Intelligencer, 1(1), 31-32.
4. Cattell, R.B. (1949). r-sub(p) and other coefficients of pattern similarity. Psychometrika, 14(4), 279-298.
5. Chemical Abstracts Service. (1997). Subject coverage and arrangement of abstracts by sections in Chemical Abstracts. Columbus, OH: Author. Chemical Abstracts Service. (1999).
6. Chemical abstracts. Content description. Columbus, OH: Author. Chemical Abstracts Service. (2004). The CA lexicon on STN. STNotes, 25, pp. 1-8.
7. Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1975). Applied multiple regression/ correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Wiley.
8. Cronbach, L.J., & Gleser, G.C. (1953). Assessing similarity between profiles. Psychological Bulletin, 50(6), 456-473.
9. Daniel, H.-D. (1991). Die Chemische Forschung im Spiegel bibliometrischer Indikatoren [Chemical research as reflected in bibliometric indicators]. Nachrichten aus Chemie, Technik und Laboratorium, 39(9), 978-980.
10. Daniel, H.-D. (1993). Guardians of science: Fairness and reliability of peer review. Weinheim, Germany: Wiley-VCH. Garfield, E. (1998). Long-term vs. short-term journal impact: Does it matter? The Scientist, 12(3), 10-12.
11. Garfield, E. (2006). The history and meaning of the Journal Impact Factor. Journal of the American Medical Association, 295(1), 90-93.
12. Glänzel, W., & Moed, H.F. (2002). Journal impact measures in bibliometric research. Seientometries, 53(2), 171-193.
13. Glänzel, W., & Schoepflin, U. (1994). A stochastic model for the ageing of scientific literature. Seientometries, 30(1), 49-64.
14. Glanzel, W., & Schoepflin, U. (1995). A bibliometric study on ageing and reception processes of scientific literature. Journal of Information Science, 21(1), 37-53.
15. Glanzel, W., Schubert, A., & Czerwon, H.J. (1999). An item-by-item subject classification of papers published in multidisciplinary and general journals using reference analysis. Seientometries, 44(3), 427-439.
16. Horn, J.L. (1961). Significance tests for use with rp and related profile statistics. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 21(2), 363-370.
17. Journal of the American Chemical Society. (2008). Guidelines for authors. Retrieved July 10, 2008, from http://pubs.acs.org/paragonplus/submission/ jacsat/jacsat-authguide.pdf
18. Long, J.S., & Freese, J. (2003). Regression models for categorical dependent variables using Stata (2nd. ed.). College Station, TX: Stata Press.
19. Marx, W. (2001). Angewandte Chemie in light of the Science Citation Index. Angewandte Chemie-International Edition, 40(1), 139-143.
20. Marx, W., Schier, H., & Wanitschek, M. (2001). Citation analysis using online databases: Feasibilities and shortcomings. Scientometrics, 52(1), 59-82.
21. Moed. H.F., van Leeuwen, T.N., & Reedijk, J. (1996). A critical analysis of the Journal Impact Factors of Angewandte Chemie and the Journal of the American Chemical Society. Inaccuracies in published impact factors based on overall citations only. Scientometrics, 37(1), 105-116.
22. Moed, H.F., van Leeuwen, T.N., & Reedijk, J. (1999). Towards appropriate indicators of journal impact. Scientometrics, 46(3), 575-589.
23. Neuhaus, C, & Daniel, H.-D. (2008). Data sources for performing citation analysis: An overview. Journal of Documentation, 64(2), 193-210.
24. Neuhaus, C, & Daniel, H.-D. (in press). A new reference standard for citation analysis in chemistry and related fields based on the sections of Chemical Abstracts. Scientometrics, 78(2).
25. Opthof, T. (1997). Sense and nonsense about the impact factor. Cardiovascular Research, 33(1), 1-7.
26. Ridley, D.D. (2001). Citation searches in on-line databases: Possibilities and pitfalls. Trends in Analytical Chemistry, 20(1), 1-10.
27. Rousseau, R. (2002). Journal evaluation: Technical and practical issues. Library Trends, 50(3), 418-439.
28. Schubert, A., & Glänzel, W. (1983). Statistical reliability of comparisons based on the citation impact of scientific publications. Scientometrics, 5(1), 59-74.
29. Seglen, RO. (1997). Citations and journal impact factors: Questionable indicators of research quality. Allergy, 52(11), 1050-1056.
30. The PLoS Medicine Editors. (2006). The Impact Factor game. It is time to find a better way to assess the scientific literature. PLoS Medicine, 3(6), e291.
31. van Leeuwen, T.N., & Moed. H.F. (2002). Development and application of journal impact measures in the Dutch science system. Scientometrics, 53(2), 249-266.
32. van Leeuwen, T.N., Moed, H.F., & Reedijk, J. (1997). JACS still topping Angewandte Chemie: Beware of erroneous impact factors. The Chemical Intelligencer, 3(3), 32-36.
33. van Leeuwen, T.N., Moed, H.F., & Reedijk, J. (1999). Critical comments on Institute for Scientific Information impact factors: A sample of inorganic molecular chemistry journals. Journal of Information Science, 25(6), 489-498.
34. Whitley, K.M. (2002). Analysis of SciFinder Scholar and Web of Science citation searches. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(14), 1210-1215.