Comparing the influence of ecology journals using citation-based indices: making sense of a multitude of metrics

IF 0.2 Q4 EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY
D. Hocking
{"title":"Comparing the influence of ecology journals using citation-based indices: making sense of a multitude of metrics","authors":"D. Hocking","doi":"10.7287/PEERJ.PREPRINTS.43V2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The links among scholarly citations creates a tremendous network that reveals patterns of influence and flows of ideas. The systematic evaluation of these networks can be used to create aggregate measures of journal influence. To understand the citation patterns and compare influence among ecology journals, I compiled 11 popular metrics for 110 ecology journals: Journal Impact Factor (JIF), 5-year Journal Impact Factor (JIF5), Eigenfactor, Article Influence (AI), Source-Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP), SCImago Journal Report (SJR), h-index, h c -index, e-index, g-index, and AR-index. All metrics were positively correlated among ecology journals; however, there was still considerable variation among metrics. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, Trends in Ecology and Evolution, and Ecology Letters were the top three journals across metrics on a per article basis. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, Ecology, and Molecular Ecology had the greatest overall influence on science, as indicated by the Eigenfactor. There was much greater variability among the other metrics because they focus on the mostly highly cited papers from each journal. Each influence metric has its own strengths and weaknesses, and therefore its own uses. Researchers interested in the average influence of articles in a journal would be best served by referring to AI scores. Despite the usefulness of citation-based metrics, they should not be overly emphasized by publishers and they should be avoided by granting agencies and in personnel decisions. Finally, citation-based metrics only capture one aspect of scientific influence, they do not consider the influence on legislation, land-use practices, public perception, or other effects outside of the publishing network.","PeriodicalId":42755,"journal":{"name":"Ideas in Ecology and Evolution","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2013-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ideas in Ecology and Evolution","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7287/PEERJ.PREPRINTS.43V2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

The links among scholarly citations creates a tremendous network that reveals patterns of influence and flows of ideas. The systematic evaluation of these networks can be used to create aggregate measures of journal influence. To understand the citation patterns and compare influence among ecology journals, I compiled 11 popular metrics for 110 ecology journals: Journal Impact Factor (JIF), 5-year Journal Impact Factor (JIF5), Eigenfactor, Article Influence (AI), Source-Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP), SCImago Journal Report (SJR), h-index, h c -index, e-index, g-index, and AR-index. All metrics were positively correlated among ecology journals; however, there was still considerable variation among metrics. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, Trends in Ecology and Evolution, and Ecology Letters were the top three journals across metrics on a per article basis. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, Ecology, and Molecular Ecology had the greatest overall influence on science, as indicated by the Eigenfactor. There was much greater variability among the other metrics because they focus on the mostly highly cited papers from each journal. Each influence metric has its own strengths and weaknesses, and therefore its own uses. Researchers interested in the average influence of articles in a journal would be best served by referring to AI scores. Despite the usefulness of citation-based metrics, they should not be overly emphasized by publishers and they should be avoided by granting agencies and in personnel decisions. Finally, citation-based metrics only capture one aspect of scientific influence, they do not consider the influence on legislation, land-use practices, public perception, or other effects outside of the publishing network.
使用基于引用的指数比较生态学期刊的影响:理解众多指标
学术引文之间的联系创造了一个巨大的网络,揭示了影响模式和思想流动。对这些网络的系统评估可以用来创建期刊影响力的综合衡量标准。为了了解生态学期刊的引用模式并比较其影响力,笔者编制了110种生态学期刊的11个常用指标:期刊影响因子(JIF)、5年期刊影响因子(JIF5)、特征因子(Eigenfactor)、文章影响因子(AI)、源标准化论文影响因子(SNIP)、SCImago Journal Report (SJR)、h指数、h c指数、e指数、g指数和ar指数。各指标在生态学期刊间呈显著正相关;然而,参数之间仍然存在相当大的差异。《生态学、进化与系统学年鉴》、《生态学与进化趋势》和《生态学通讯》是每篇文章数量排名前三的期刊。从特征因子可以看出,《英国皇家学会学报B辑》、《生态学》和《分子生态学》对科学的总体影响最大。其他指标的差异要大得多,因为它们关注的是每份期刊中被引用次数最多的论文。每个影响度量标准都有自己的优点和缺点,因此也有自己的用途。对期刊文章的平均影响力感兴趣的研究人员最好参考人工智能分数。尽管基于引用的指标很有用,但出版商不应过分强调它们,授权机构和人事决策也应避免使用它们。最后,基于引用的指标只捕获了科学影响力的一个方面,它们没有考虑对立法、土地使用实践、公众认知或出版网络之外的其他影响的影响。
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
Ideas in Ecology and Evolution
Ideas in Ecology and Evolution EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
4
审稿时长
36 weeks
×
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