Journal Impact Factor, Eigenfactor, Journal Influence and Article Influence

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Journal Impact Factor, Eigenfactor, Journal Influence and Article Influence
Authors: Chang, Chia-Lin, McAleer, Michael, Oxley, Les
Contributors: Universidad Complutense de Madrid
Source: E-Prints Complutense: Archivo Institucional de la UCM
Universidad Complutense de Madrid
Docta Complutense
instname
E-Prints Complutense. Archivo Institucional de la UCM
Publication Status: Preprint
Publisher Information: Econometric Institute, 2012.
Publication Year: 2012
Subject Terms: Journal performance metrics, Research assessment measures, Total citations, 5-year impact factor (5YIF), Eigenfactor, Journal and Article influence, Research assessment measures, Journal and Article influence, ddc:330, Welt, 5-year impact factor (5YIF), Eigenfactor, Journal performance metrics, Total citations, jel:A12, Recuperación de la información, Bibliometrie, Sozialwissenschaft, Fachzeitschrift, 5302 Econometría, Econometría (Economía), Bibliometría, 5-year impact factor (5YIF), eigenfactor, journal and article influence, journal performance metrics, research assessment measures, total citations, Econometría, A12
Description: This paper examines the practical usefulness of two new journal performance metrics, namely the Eigenfactor score, which may be interpreted as measuring “Journal Influence”, and the Article Influence score, using the Thomson Reuters ISI Web of Science (hereafter ISI) data for 2009 for the 200 most highly cited journals in each of the Sciences and Social Sciences, and compares them with two existing ISI metrics, namely Total Citations and the 5-year Impact Factor (5YIF) of a journal (including journal self citations). It is shown that the Sciences and Social Sciences are different in terms of the strength of the relationship of journal performance metrics, although the actual relationships are very similar. Moreover, the journal influence and article influence journal performance metrics are shown to be closely related empirically to the two existing ISI metrics, and hence add little in practical usefulness to what is already known. These empirical results are compared with existing results in the literature.
Document Type: Research
External research report
Report
File Description: application/pdf
Access URL: https://eprints.ucm.es/id/eprint/15686/1/1215.pdf
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/49095
https://pure.eur.nl/en/publications/6ce30830-2f02-4a0b-8c20-ebdf7cd62f1e
http://hdl.handle.net/10419/87243
http://papers.tinbergen.nl/13002.pdf
http://www.econ.canterbury.ac.nz/RePEc/cbt/econwp/1213.pdf
http://eprints.ucm.es/15686/1/1215.pdf
http://www.kier.kyoto-u.ac.jp/DP/DP822.pdf
https://repub.eur.nl/pub/37619/EI2012-27.pdf
Rights: CC BY NC
URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/es/
Accession Number: edsair.dedup.wf.002..0574ec1ea3a6f60bf744f0b1e35e2c44
Database: OpenAIRE
Description
Abstract:This paper examines the practical usefulness of two new journal performance metrics, namely the Eigenfactor score, which may be interpreted as measuring “Journal Influence”, and the Article Influence score, using the Thomson Reuters ISI Web of Science (hereafter ISI) data for 2009 for the 200 most highly cited journals in each of the Sciences and Social Sciences, and compares them with two existing ISI metrics, namely Total Citations and the 5-year Impact Factor (5YIF) of a journal (including journal self citations). It is shown that the Sciences and Social Sciences are different in terms of the strength of the relationship of journal performance metrics, although the actual relationships are very similar. Moreover, the journal influence and article influence journal performance metrics are shown to be closely related empirically to the two existing ISI metrics, and hence add little in practical usefulness to what is already known. These empirical results are compared with existing results in the literature.