Information Sources and Indicators for the Assessment of Journal Reputation and Impact

Reference Librarian

Volumn 57, Issue 1, 2016, Pages 13-22

  Walters, William H ^a  

^a MANHATTAN COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

Academic journals; bibliometric services; citation analysis; impact; rankings; ratings; reputation

Indexed keywords

EID: 84955446776     PISSN: 02763877     EISSN: 15411117     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02763877.2015.1088426     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. AACSB International. (2015). Eligibility procedures and accreditation standards for business accreditation. Retrieved from http://www.aacsb.edu/accreditation/standards/2013-business/download/
2. Australian Research Council. (2011). Ranked journal list development. Retrieved from http://www.arc.gov.au/era/journal_list_dev.htm
3. Australian Research Council. (2014). Excellence in research for Australia. Retrieved from http://www.arc.gov.au/era/
4. J.Beall, (2015a). Beall’s list: Potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly Open-Access publishers. Retrieved from http://scholarlyoa.com/publishers/ LIST
5. J.Beall, (2015b). Criteria for determining predatory Open-Access publishers. Retrieved from https://scholarlyoa.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/criteria-2015.pdf CRITERIA
6. J.Beall, (2015c). Potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly Open-Access journals. Retrieved from http://scholarlyoa.com/individual-journals/ LIST
7. J.Beall, (2015d). Scholarly Open Access: Critical analysis of scholarly Open-Access publishing. Retrieved from https://scholarlyoa.com/ BLOG
8. P.Berkvens, (2012). SciVerse Scopus custom data documentation. Retrieved from http://ebrp.elsevier.com/pdf/Scopus_Custom_Data_Documentation_v4.pdf
9. L.Bjørnshauge,, S.Brage,, D.Mitchell,, T.Olijhoek,, & R.Zeylon, (2014). Directory of open access journals. Retrieved from http://doaj.org/
10. M.Bladek, (2014). Bibilometrics services and the academic library: Meeting the emerging needs of the campus community. College & Undergraduate Libraries, 21(3–4), 330–344. doi:10.1080/10691316.2014.929066
11. J.D.Brown, (2014). Citation searching for tenure and promotion: An overview of issues and tools. Reference Services Review, 42(1), 70–89. doi:10.1108/RSR-05-2013-0023
12. Cabell Publishing. (2015a). About Cabell’s rankings. Retrieved from http://cabells.com/rankings.aspx
13. Cabell Publishing. (2015b). Cabell’s selection policy. Retrieved from http://cabells.com/SelectionPolicyRevised2015.doc
14. S.Corrall,, M.A.Kennan,, & W.Afzal, (2013). Bibliometrics and research data management services: Emerging trends in library support for research. Library Trends, 61(3), 636–674. doi:10.1353/lib.2013.0005
15. Elsevier. (2015a). About journal metrics. Retrieved from http://www.journalmetrics.com/about-journal-metrics.php
16. Elsevier. (2015b). Journal metrics. Retrieved from http://www.journalmetrics.com/
17. F.Galligan,, & S.Dyas-Correia, (2013). Altmetrics: Rethinking the way we measure. Serials Review, 39(1), 56–61. doi:10.1080/00987913.2013.10765486
18. K.M.Gast,, W.M.J.Kuzon, W. M., & J.F.Waljee, (2014). Bibliometric indices and academic promotion within plastic surgery. Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, 134(5), 838e–844e. doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000000594
19. Google. (2014). Google Scholar metrics. Retrieved from http://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=top_venues
20. Google. (2015). Google Scholar. Retrieved from http://scholar.google.com/
21. L.J.Graham, (2008). Rank and file: Assessing research quality in Australia. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 40(7), 811–815. doi:10.1111/j.1469-5812.2008.00478.x
22. B.Hammarfelt, (2014). Using altmetrics for assessing research impact in the humanities. Scientometrics, 101(2), 1419–1430. doi:10.1007/s11192-014-1261-3
23. A.W.Harzing, (2015a). Journal quality list. Retrieved from http://www.harzing.com/jql.htm
24. A.W.Harzing, (2015b). Publish or perish. Retrieved from http://www.harzing.com/pop.htm
25. S.Haustein,, I.Peters,, J.Bar-Ilan,, J.Priem,, H.Shema,, & J.Terliesner, (2014). Coverage and adoption of altmetrics sources in the bibliometric community. Scientometrics, 101(2), 1145–1163. doi:10.1007/s11192-013-1221-3
26. P.Jacsó, (2010). Metadata mega mess in Google Scholar. Online Information Review, 34(1), 175–191. doi:10.1108/14684521011024191
27. P.Jacsó, (2011). Google scholar duped and deduped–The aura of “robometrics”. Online Information Review, 35(1), 154–160. doi:10.1108/14684521111113632
28. P.Jacsó, (2012). Using Google Scholar for journal impact factors and the h‐index in nationwide publishing assessments in academia: Siren songs and air‐raid sirens. Online Information Review, 36(3), 462–478. doi:10.1108/14684521211241503
29. M.A.Kennan,, S.Corrall,, & W.Afzal, (2014). “Making space” in practice and education: Research support services in academic libraries. Library Management, 35(8–9), 666–683. doi:10.1108/LM-03-2014-0037
30. V.K.Khodiyar,, K.A.Rowlett,, & R.N.Lawrence, (2014). Altmetrics as a means of assessing scholarly output. Learned Publishing, 27(5), 25–32. doi:10.1087/20140505
31. J.Lamp, (2012). ERA journal rankings access. Retrieved from http://lamp.infosys.deakin.edu.au/era/?page=jmain
32. G.A.Lozano,, V.Larivière,, & Y.Gingras, (2012). The weakening relationship between the impact factor and papers’ citations in the digital age. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(11), 2140–2145. doi:10.1002/asi.22731
33. C.Neuhaus,, E.Neuhaus,, A.Asher,, & C.Wrede, (2006). The depth and breadth of Google Scholar: An empirical study. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 6(2), 127–141. doi:10.1353/pla.2006.0026
34. R.W.Stidham,, K.Sauder,, & P.D.R.Higgins, (2012). Using bibliometrics to advance your academic career. Gastroenterology, 143(3), 520–523. doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2012.07.024
35. J.Testa, (2012). The Thomson Reuters journal selection process. Retrieved from http://wokinfo.com/essays/journal-selection-process/
36. Thomson Reuters. (2014). Journals in the 2014 release of JCR. Retrieved from http://scientific.thomsonreuters.com/imgblast/JCRFullCovlist-2014.pdf
37. W.H.Walters, (2007). Google Scholar coverage of a multidisciplinary field. Information Processing & Management, 43(4), 1121–1132. doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2006.08.006
38. W.H.Walters, (2011). Comparative recall and precision of simple and expert searches in Google Scholar and eight other databases. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 11(4), 971–1006. doi:10.1353/pla.2011.0042
39. W.H.Walters,, & A.C.Linvill, (2011). Characteristics of open access journals in six subject areas. College & Research Libraries, 72(4), 372–392. doi:10.5860/crl-132
40. J.D.West,, C.T.Bergstrom,, B.Althouse,, M.Rosvall,, T.C.Bergstrom,, & D.Vilhena, (2012). Eigenfactor.org. Retrieved from http://www.eigenfactor.org/
41. Z.Zahedi,, R.Costas,, & P.Wouters, (2014). How well developed are altmetrics? A cross-disciplinary analysis of the presence of ‘alternative metrics’ in scientific publications. Scientometrics, 101(2), 1491–1513. doi:10.1007/s11192-014-1264-0