Extinction by citation deficiency: are botany journals at risk?

I. Riley
{"title":"Extinction by citation deficiency: are botany journals at risk?","authors":"I. Riley","doi":"10.1108/jd-09-2021-0181","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeWith the current dynamics of scientific publishing increasingly driven by citation metrics, it is quite possible this will lead to the loss of some lower-ranked journals as they will be undervalued by authors, research institutions and research funders. This has been specifically predicted for natural science journals, but the efforts of editors of such journals to improve reputation have not been quantitatively assessed. This research aimed to fill this knowledge gap and assess the potential vulnerability of lower-ranked botany journals.Design/methodology/approachChanges in article citation rates since 2009 for 21 lower-ranked general botany journals were examined by least squares linear regression and factors potentially predictive of higher citation potential by principal component analysis. The findings were then examined in a case study of the publishing that followed the celebrated discovery of a living-fossil plant (Wollemia nobilis) in the mid-1990s.FindingsArticle citation rates steadily declined across most of these 21 journals over the period, and if submissions had been favoured (directly or indirectly) for citation potential, this appears to have been an ineffective, perhaps even a flawed, endeavour. Analysis of quantifiable article attributes across a subset of these journals revealed inconsistent relationships with no predictive value for citation potential. The case study clearly highlighted some processes contributing to declining citation rates and the value of botanical reporting well beyond that indicated by citation metrics.Research limitations/implicationsIt is not possible to know how important prediction of citation potential (directly or indirectly) is when journal editors accept papers for review or publication (such information is not made public, and this might not be a formalised process), so this study is only based what is considered (by the author) to be a reasonable assumption that all journals aim to improve their reputation and use citation metrics as one determinant of this.Social implicationsUnless we give value to lower-ranked regional botany journals in other ways than citations, the current trends in citation rates could lead to the diminution, even loss, of their valuable contribution biodiversity conservation.Originality/valueAlthough concerns have been expressed about the long-term viability of natural history journals, this is the first research to examine this quantitatively using citation metrics.","PeriodicalId":402385,"journal":{"name":"J. Documentation","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"J. Documentation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jd-09-2021-0181","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

PurposeWith the current dynamics of scientific publishing increasingly driven by citation metrics, it is quite possible this will lead to the loss of some lower-ranked journals as they will be undervalued by authors, research institutions and research funders. This has been specifically predicted for natural science journals, but the efforts of editors of such journals to improve reputation have not been quantitatively assessed. This research aimed to fill this knowledge gap and assess the potential vulnerability of lower-ranked botany journals.Design/methodology/approachChanges in article citation rates since 2009 for 21 lower-ranked general botany journals were examined by least squares linear regression and factors potentially predictive of higher citation potential by principal component analysis. The findings were then examined in a case study of the publishing that followed the celebrated discovery of a living-fossil plant (Wollemia nobilis) in the mid-1990s.FindingsArticle citation rates steadily declined across most of these 21 journals over the period, and if submissions had been favoured (directly or indirectly) for citation potential, this appears to have been an ineffective, perhaps even a flawed, endeavour. Analysis of quantifiable article attributes across a subset of these journals revealed inconsistent relationships with no predictive value for citation potential. The case study clearly highlighted some processes contributing to declining citation rates and the value of botanical reporting well beyond that indicated by citation metrics.Research limitations/implicationsIt is not possible to know how important prediction of citation potential (directly or indirectly) is when journal editors accept papers for review or publication (such information is not made public, and this might not be a formalised process), so this study is only based what is considered (by the author) to be a reasonable assumption that all journals aim to improve their reputation and use citation metrics as one determinant of this.Social implicationsUnless we give value to lower-ranked regional botany journals in other ways than citations, the current trends in citation rates could lead to the diminution, even loss, of their valuable contribution biodiversity conservation.Originality/valueAlthough concerns have been expressed about the long-term viability of natural history journals, this is the first research to examine this quantitatively using citation metrics.
引文不足导致的灭绝:植物学期刊处于危险之中吗?
随着当前科学出版越来越受引文指标的驱动,这很可能导致一些排名较低的期刊的流失,因为它们将被作者、研究机构和研究资助者低估。这是专门针对自然科学期刊的预测,但这类期刊的编辑为提高声誉所做的努力还没有得到定量评估。本研究旨在填补这一知识空白,并评估排名较低的植物学期刊的潜在脆弱性。设计/方法/方法采用最小二乘法线性回归分析了2009年以来21种排名较低的普通植物学期刊文章被引率的变化,并采用主成分分析分析了可能预测较高被引潜力的因素。在90年代中期,一种著名的植物活化石(Wollemia nobilis)被发现后,研究人员对这些发现进行了案例研究。在此期间,这21种期刊中的大多数期刊的文章引用率稳步下降,如果提交的文章(直接或间接)因引用潜力而受到青睐,那么这似乎是一种无效的,甚至可能是有缺陷的努力。对这些期刊子集的可量化文章属性的分析显示,不一致的关系对引用潜力没有预测价值。该案例研究清楚地强调了一些导致引用率下降的过程,以及植物报告的价值远远超出引用指标所显示的范围。当期刊编辑接受论文评审或发表时,不可能知道(直接或间接)预测引用潜力有多重要(这些信息不公开,这可能不是一个正式的过程),因此本研究仅基于(作者)认为合理的假设,即所有期刊都旨在提高其声誉,并使用引用指标作为这方面的一个决定因素。如果我们不以引文以外的其他方式给予排名较低的区域性植物学期刊价值,当前的引文率趋势可能导致其对生物多样性保护的宝贵贡献的减少甚至丧失。原创性/价值尽管人们对自然历史期刊的长期生存能力表示担忧,但这是第一次使用引用指标对其进行定量研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信