The journal impact factor: Angel, devil, or scapegoat? A comment on J.K. Vanclay's article 2011

Scientometrics

Volumn 92, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 485-503

  Zitt, Michel ^a,b  

^a LERECO   (France)

^b Observatoire des Sciences et des Techniques (OST)   (France)

Author keywords

Bibliometric measures; Citation behavior; Citation normalization; Citing side normalization; Field normalized impact factor; Impact factor; Impact factor limitations; Source level normalization

Indexed keywords

EID: 84864290103     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-012-0697-6     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. Adams, J., Gurney, K., & Marshall, S. (2007). Profiling citation impact: a new methodology. Scientometrics, 72(2), 325-344.
2. Adler, R., Ewing, J., & Taylor, P. (2008). Citation statistics. A report from the International Mathematical Union (IMU) in cooperation with the International Council of Industrial and Applied Mathematics (ICIAM) and the International Council of Institute of Mathematical Statistics (IMS). Summarized in (2009). Statistical Science, 24(1), 1-14.
3. Bar-Ilan, J. (2008). Which h-index? - A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics, 74(2), 257-271.
4. Bergstrom, C. (2007). Eigenfactor: measuring the value and prestige of scholarly journals. College & Research Libraries News, 68, 5, www. ala. org/ala/acrl/acrlpubs/crlnews/backissues2007/may2007/eigenfactor. cfm.
5. Bollen, J., van de Sompel, H., Hagberg, A., & Chute, R. (2009). A principal component analysis of 39 scientific impact measures. PLoS ONE, 4(6), e6022. doi: 10. 1371/journal. pone. 0006022.
6. Bourdieu, P. (1975). The specificity of the scientific field and the social conditions of the progress of reason. Social Science Information, 14(6), 19-47.
7. Bouyssou, D., & Marchant, T. (2011). Bibliometric rankings of journals based on impact factors: an axiomatic approach. Journal of Informetrics, 5(1), 75-86. doi: 10. 1016/j. joi. 2010. 09. 001.
8. Braun, T., Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2006). A Hirsch-type index for journals. Scientometrics, 69, 169-173.
9. Callon, M., & Latour, B. (1981). Unscrewing the big leviathan: how actors macrostructure reality and how sociologists help them to do so. In Karin. D. Knorr Cetina & Aaraon. V. Cicourel (Eds.), Advances in social theory and methodology: toward an integration of micro- and macro-sociologies (pp. 277-303). Boston: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
10. Cronin, B. (1984). The citation process; the role and significance of citations in scientific communication. London: Taylor Graham.
11. Czapski, G. (1997). The use of deciles of the citation impact to evaluate different fields of research in Israel. Scientometrics, 40(3), 437-443.
12. de Moya-Anegon, F. (2007). SCImago. SJR - SCImago Journal & Country Rank.
13. de Solla Price, D. J. (1963). Little science, big science. New York: Columbia University Press.
14. Garfield, E. (1955). Citation Indexes for Science. A new dimension in documentation through association of ideas. Science, 122, 108-111.
15. Garfield, E. (1972). Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation. Science, 178(4060), 471-479.
16. Garfield, E. (2006). The history and meaning of the journal impact factor. Journal of the American Medical Association, 295, 90-93.
17. Garfield, E., & Sher, I. H. (1963). New factors in the evaluation of scientific literature through citation indexing. American Documentation, 14(3), 195-201.
18. Geller, N. L. (1978). Citation influence methodology of Pinski and Narin. Information Processing and Management, 14, 93-95.
19. Glänzel, W. (2008). On some new bibliometric applications of statistics related to the h-index. Scientometrics, 77(1), 187-196.
20. Glanzel, W., & Moed, H. F. (2002). Journal impact measures in bibliometric research. Scientometrics, 53(2), 171-193.
21. Glänzel, W., Schubert, A., Thijs, B., & Debackere, K. (2011). A priori vs. a posteriori normalisation of citation indicators. The case of journal ranking. Scientometrics, 87(2), 415-424.
22. Hagström, W. O. (1965). The scientific community. New York: Basic Books.
23. Hicks, D. (2004). The four literatures of social science. In H. Moed, W. Glanzel, & U. Schmoch (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative science and technology research. New York: Kluwer Academic.
24. Hirsch, J. E. (2007). Does the h index have predictive power? Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(49), 19193-19198.
25. Hoeffel, C. (1998). Journal impact factors. Allergy, 53, 1225.
26. Hönekopp, J., & Khan, J. (2011). Future publication success in science is better predicted by traditional measures than by the h index. Scientometrics, 90(3), 843-853.
27. Ingwersen, P., Larsen, B., Rousseau, R., & Russell, J. (2001). The publication-citation matrix and its derived quantities. Chinese Science Bulletin, 46(6), 524-528.
28. Katz, S. J. (1999). The self-similar science system. Research policy, 28(5), 501-517.
29. Leydesdorff, L., & Opthof, T. (2010). Scopus's source normalized impact per paper (SNIP) versus a journal impact factor based on fractional counting of citations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(11), 2365-2396.
30. Lundberg, J. (2007). Lifting the crown: citation z-score. Journal of Informetrics, 1(2), 145-154.
31. Luukkonen, T. (1997). Why has Latour's theory of citations been ignored by the bibliometric community? Discussion of sociological interpretations of citation analysis. Scientometrics, 38(1), 27-37.
32. Marchant, T. (2009). An axiomatic characterization of the ranking based on the h-index and some other bibliometric rankings of authors. Scientometrics, 80(2), 325-342.
33. Marshakova-Shaikevich, I. (1996). The standard impact factor as an evaluation tool of science fields and scientific journals. Scientometrics, 35(2), 283-290.
34. Merton, R. K. (1942). Science and technology in a democratic order. Journal of legal and political sociology, 1, 115-126 (reprint: The normative structure of science (1973). In Storer N. W. (ed.), The sociology of science: theoretical and empirical investigations (pp. 1267-1278). Chicago: University of Chicago Press).
35. Moed, H. F. (2010). Measuring contextual citation impact of scientific journals. Journal of Informetrics, 4(3), 265-277.
36. Moed, H. F., & van Leeuwen, T. N. (1995). Improving the accuracy of institute for scientific information's journal impact factors. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 46(6), 461-467.
37. Moed, H. F., & Vriens, M. (1989). Possible inaccuracies occurring in citation analysis. Journal of Information Science, 15, 95-107.
38. Murugesan, P., & Moravcsik, M. J. (1978). Variation of the nature of citation measures with journal and scientific specialties. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 29(3), 141-155.
39. Narin, F. (1976). Evaluative bibliometrics: the use of publication and citation analysis in the evaluation of scientific activity (Report prepared for the National Science Foundation, Contract NSF C-627). Cherry Hill: Computer Horizons.
40. Nicolaisen, J., & Frandsen, T. F. (2008). The reference return ratio. Journal of Informetrics, 2(2), 128-135. doi: 10. 1016/j. joi. 2007. 12. 001.
41. Palacios Huerta, I., & Volij, O. (2004). The Measurement of intellectual influence. Econometrica, 72(3), 963-977.
42. Pinski, G., & Narin, F. (1976). Citation influence for journal aggregates of scientific publications: theory, with application to the literature of physics. Information Processing and Management, 12, 297-312.
43. Raddichi, F., Fortunato, S., & Castellano, C. (2008). Universality of citation distributions: towards an objective measure of citation impact. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(45), 17268-17272.
44. Ramanana-Rahary, S., Zitt, M., & Rousseau, R. (2009). Aggregation properties of relative impact and other classical indicators: convexity issues and the Yule-Simpson paradox. Scientometrics, 79(1-2), 311-327.
45. Rousseau, R. (2008). Woeginger's axiomatisation of the h-index and its relation to the g-index, the h(2)-index and the r2-index. Journal of Informetrics, 2(4), 335-340.
46. Rousseau, R., & Egghe, L. (2003). A general framework for relative impact indicators. Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science, 27(1), 29-48.
47. Schubert, A., & Braun, T. (1986). Relative indicators and relational charts for comparative assessment of publication output and citation impact. Scientometrics, 9(5-6), 281-291.
48. Seglen, P. O. (1992). The skewness of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 43, 628-638.
49. Sen, B. K. (1992). Documentation Note Normalized Impact Factor. Journal of Documentation, 48(3), 318-325.
50. Small, H., & Sweeney, E. (1985). Clustering the science citation index using co-citations: 1. A comparison of methods. Scientometrics, 7(3-6), 391-409.
51. van Raan, A. F. J. (2000). On growth, ageing, and fractal differentiation of science. Scientometrics, 47(2), 347-362.
52. van Raan, A. F. J. (2001). Competition amongst scientists for publication status: toward a model of scientific publication and citation distributions. Scientometrics, 51(1), 347-357.
53. Vanclay, J. K. (2009). Bias in the journal impact factor. Scientometrics, 78(1), 3-12.
54. Vanclay, J. K. (2011). Impact Factor: outdated artefact or stepping-stone to journal certification? Scientometrics,. doi: 10. 1007/s11192-011-0561-0.
55. Vieira, E. S., & Gomez, J. A. N. F. (2011). The journal relative impact: an indicator for journal assessment. Scientometrics, 89(2), 631-651.
56. Vinkler, P. (2002). Subfield problems in applying the Garfield (impact) factors in practice. Scientometrics, 53(2), 267-279.
57. Waltman, L., van Eck, N. J., van Leeuwen, T. N., Visser, M. S., & van Raan, A. F. J. (2011). Towards a new crown indicator: some theoretical considerations. Journal of Informetrics, 5, 37-47.
58. Waltman, L., & van Eck, N. J. (2009). A taxonomy of bibliometric performance indicators based on the property of consistency. Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, 1002-1003.
59. Wouters, P. (1997). Citation cycles and peer review cycles. Scientometrics, 38(1), 39-55.
60. Zitt, M. (2010). Citing-side normalization of journal impact: a robust variant of the audience factor. Journal of Informetrics, 4(3), 392-406.
61. Zitt, M. (2011). Behind citing-side normalization of citations: some properties of the journal impact factor. Scientometrics, 89(1), 329-344.
62. Zitt, M., Ramanana-Rahary, S., & Bassecoulard, E. (2003). Correcting glasses help fair comparisons in international science landscape: country indicators as a function of ISI database delineation. Scientometrics, 56(2), 259-282.
63. Zitt, M., Ramanana-Rahary, S., & Bassecoulard, E. (2005). Relativity of citation performance and excellence measures: from cross-field to cross-scale effects of field-normalisation. Scientometrics, 63(2), 373-401.
64. Zitt, M., & Small, H. (2008). Modifying the journal impact factor by fractional citation weighting: the audience factor. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(11), 1856-1860.
65. Zucker, L. G., & Darby, M. R. (1996). Star scientists and institutional transformation: patterns of invention and innovation in the formation of the biotechnology industry. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 93(23), 12709-12716.