scholarly journals Detecting anomalous citation groups in journal networks

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sadamori Kojaku ◽  
Giacomo Livan ◽  
Naoki Masuda
Keyword(s):  
Null Model ◽  
Impact Factors ◽  
Academic Publishing ◽  
Scientific Communities ◽  
Citation Behavior ◽  
Journal Editors ◽  
Journal Citation Reports ◽  
Academic Climate ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Publication Standards

AbstractThe ever-increasing competitiveness in the academic publishing market incentivizes journal editors to pursue higher impact factors. This translates into journals becoming more selective, and, ultimately, into higher publication standards. However, the fixation on higher impact factors leads some journals to artificially boost impact factors through the coordinated effort of a “citation cartel” of journals. “Citation cartel” behavior has become increasingly common in recent years, with several instances being reported. Here, we propose an algorithm—named CIDRE—to detect anomalous groups of journals that exchange citations at excessively high rates when compared against a null model that accounts for scientific communities and journal size. CIDRE detects more than half of the journals suspended from Journal Citation Reports due to anomalous citation behavior in the year of suspension or in advance. Furthermore, CIDRE detects many new anomalous groups, where the impact factors of the member journals are lifted substantially higher by the citations from other member journals. We describe a number of such examples in detail and discuss the implications of our findings with regard to the current academic climate.

Journal influence in corporate research

2016 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 376-389 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth Borokhovich ◽  
Allissa Lee ◽  
Betty Simkins
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Corporate Finance ◽  
Relative Influence ◽  
Impact Factors ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Journal Citation Reports ◽  
The Social ◽  
Total Influence ◽  
The Impact

Purpose – Studies of research influence commonly look at the overall field of finance. The purpose of this paper is to examine the sub-field of corporate finance at four different points in time to determine its evolution and range of influence, specifically focussing on the relative influence of seven leading journals. Design/methodology/approach – Not all articles appearing in the set of journals are in corporate finance. The authors examine each article published in the journals for four key periods and identify those that are corporate. The impact factors (IFs) published in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) are for all articles appearing in a journal. The authors are interested only in the corporate articles, so the authors calculate separate corporate IFs based on the citations to the corporate articles using the JCR technique. Findings – The authors find a broad corporate research environment with influence that extends well beyond finance. The authors also find differences in the relative influence of the journals not only in their total influence, but in where the influence occurs outside finance and other business journals and even more broadly in the social sciences. Research limitations/implications – The exclusion of journals outside the seven selected may not uncover other areas where corporate finance articles impact research more broadly. Also, classification of articles is inherently subjective. Practical implications – The authors draw comparisons between journals and corporate finance topic areas; indicating the breadth and depth research in these areas attain. These results should prove beneficial to researchers in determining areas of influence for their work, consequently providing opportunities for additional exchanges of ideas resulting in better and more informed research in the overall social sciences. Further, our approach to analyzing journal influence could prove fruitful for additional research. Originality/value – The findings allow for a greater understanding of the influence of individual journals and their subsequent rankings by a number of different means. The authors propose that the means and measures employed here can lead to a greater understanding of how influential a journal really is. Further, the authors contend that the study provides comparisons of the scope and depth of influence for each journal in a way that could lead to new avenues of research.

Significant impact of developing countries and emerging markets in Systematic and Applied Acarology

2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (7) ◽  
pp. 1121-1123
Author(s):  
Zhi-Qiang Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
Emerging Markets ◽  
Impact Factor ◽  
Impact Factors ◽  
Journal Citation Reports ◽  
Number Of Publications ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Journal Impact ◽  
Journal Citation

Journal impact factors for 2018 were recently announced by Clarivate Analytics in the June 2019 edition of Journal Citation Reports (JCR). In this editorial, I compared the impact factor of Systematic and Applied Acarology (SAA) with those of other main acarological journals as I did in Zhang (2017). Following Zhang (2018a), I also highlighted the top 10 SAA papers from 2016/2017 with the highest numbers of citations in 2018 (according to JCR June 2019 edition). In addition, I remarked on the increasing impact of developing countries and emerging markets in systematic and applied acarology, both in the number of publications and citations, and also include announcements of meetings on applied acarology.

Impact factors, citations, and GEOPHYSICS

Geophysics ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 70 (2) ◽  
pp. 3MA-17MA ◽  
Author(s):  
Markku Peltoniemi
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Citation Count ◽  
Threshold Value ◽  
Impact Factors ◽  
Geophysical Prospecting ◽  
Geophysical Research ◽  
Journal Citation Reports ◽  
History Of Geophysics ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
The Impact

This review assesses the contributions and impact that GEOPHYSICS journal has made to both the theory and the applications of exploration geophysics during its publication life span. The contributions are evaluated first on the basis of Journal Citation Reports data, which summarize information available since 1975 about the impact factor of our journal. The impact factor for GEOPHYSICS in 1975–2002 has ranged between 1.461 and 0.591, with an average of 0.924 and with a relative ranking between 16 and 45 for all journals in its category. The journal receiving the highest impact factor for the period 2000–2003 in the “Geochemistry and Geophysics” category is Reviews of Geophysics, with an average impact factor of 7.787 and which ranged between 9.226 and 6.083. A second and important criterion is the frequency with which individual papers published in GEOPHYSICS have been cited elsewhere. This information is available for the entire publication history of GEOPHYSICS and supports the choices made for the early classic papers. These were listed in both the Silver and the Golden Anniversary issues of GEOPHYSICS. In August 2004, the five most-cited papers in GEOPHYSICS published in the time period 1936 to February 2003 are Thomsen (1986) with 423 citations, Constable et al. (1987) with 380 citations, Cagniard (1953) with 354 citations, Sen et al. (1981) with 313 citations, and Stolt (1978) with 307 citations. Fifteen more papers exceed a threshold value of 200 citations. During 2000–2002, GEOPHYSICS, Geophysical Prospecting, Geophysical Journal International, and Journal of Applied Geophysics were the four journals with the highest number of citations of papers published in GEOPHYSICS. In the same 2000–2002 period, those journals in which papers published in GEOPHYSICS are cited most are GEOPHYSICS, Geophysical Prospecting, Geophysical Journal International, and Journal of Geophysical Research. During 1985, the total number of citations in all journals in the Science Citation Index database to papers published in GEOPHYSICS was 2657. By 2002, this same citation count for GEOPHYSICS had increased to 4784.

Citation analysis of otorhinolaryngology journals: follow-up study

2015 ◽  
Vol 129 (5) ◽  
pp. 489-493 ◽  
Author(s):  
D H Coelho ◽  
L W Edelmayer ◽  
J E Fenton
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Impact Factors ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Follow Up Study ◽  
The Past ◽  
Journal Citation Reports ◽  
Online Edition ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Journal Impact

AbstractObjective:This study aimed to evaluate the changes in impact factors of otorhinolaryngology journals over the past 15 years.Method:Using the online edition of Journal Citation Reports, standard (2-year) and 5-year impact factors were calculated for the leading 15 journals.Results:The results were compared with the impact factors for 1998. The average standard impact factor and 5-year impact factor increased by 2.72 and 2.05 fold respectively when compared with 1998. The average 2012 standard impact factor and 5-year impact factor were 1.82 and 1.99 respectively, reflecting a 9.3 per cent difference. The average 1998 standard impact factor and 5-year impact factor were 0.67 and 0.97 respectively, reflecting a 44.8 per cent difference. The Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology had the highest standard and five-year impact factors.Conclusion:These data may indicate changing clinical and research interests within our field, as well as increased speed and ease with which the internet has allowed citation. As a result, five-year intervals may no longer be necessary to adequately gauge journal impact.

scholarly journals ANALYSIS OF OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY, ORTHOPEDICS AND THORACIC SURGERY JOURNALS

2015 ◽  
Vol 42 (suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 62-64
Author(s):  
Wilma Terezinha Anselmo Lima
Keyword(s):  
Thoracic Surgery ◽  
Impact Factor ◽  
Google Scholar ◽  
Impact Factors ◽  
Active Search ◽  
Journal Citation Reports ◽  
Extensive Analysis ◽  
Chest Surgery ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Surgery Journals

Objectives: To perform an extensive analysis of journals in Medicine III - CAPES, and specifically those in the areas of Otorhinolaryngology, Orthopedics and Traumatology and Chest Surgery. Method: An active search for the impact factors in the Journal Citation Reports, Scimago, their indexation in Scielo, Lilacs, Scopus and Google Scholar, and their stratification in WebQualis was done. Results: Forty-four journals with measured impact factors ranging from 3.006 to 0.128 were detected in the area of Otorhinolaryngology; however, only 26 of them (60%) had a Qualis measured by CAPES; in the stratification, no journal was detected in A1, three were A2 and nine B1. Three journals were located for Chest Surgery, with only one of them having a measured Qualis (A2) with a mean of 3.61. Sixty-seven journals were detected for Orthopedics and Traumatology, with an impact factor ranging from 4.699 to 0.156; Qualis was measured in only 38 of them (60%); there were three journal stratified as A1, seven as A2 and 25 as B1. Conclusion: The search for journals of higher impact induces authors to not publish in journals related to their area and facing more difficulties than investigators from other areas.

scholarly journals Tendency towards the Self-citation among Journals in Iran and Turkey

2007 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 297-309
Author(s):  
Mohammad Hossein Biglu
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Citation Rate ◽  
Data Bank ◽  
Mean Value ◽  
Negative Trend ◽  
The Self ◽  
Impact Factors ◽  
Journal Citation Reports ◽  
The Mean ◽  
The Impact

This paper investigates the trends of Impact Factors and self-citation rates of journals indexed in the JCR by two neighbouring countries Iran and Turkey for a period of five years (2000- 2005). All data extracted from the Journal Citation Reports – Science Edition (2000-2005). The study showed that the portion of Turkish journals entering data to the JCR data bank is two times higher than the portion of Iranian journals. From a total number of 6,088 journals in the JCR in 2005, 3 (0.05%) were published in Iran and the same number of journals published in Turkey. The 6,088 journals in the JCR produced 847,114 articles, 159 (0.02%) appeared in the Iranian journals and 352 (0.04%) in the Turkish journals. Of the 22,353,992 citations in 2005, 214 (0.001%) came from Iranian journals and 911 (0.004%) came from Turkish journals. The self-citation tendency by Iranian journals has increased dramatically throughout the period of study, it reached from 8% self-citation rate in 2000 to 18% in 2005, an increase of 2.25 times, whereas the self-citation rate by Turkish journals showed a negative trend, its self-citation rate fell from 22% in 2002 to 15% in 2005. The Impact Factors of Turkish journals showed faster growth than the Iranian journals, the mean value of Impact Factor for Turkish journals in 2000 was 0.49 under than the mean value of Impact Factor for Iranian journals, but in 2005 the mean value of Impact Factor for Turkish journals stayed 0.14 higher than the mean value of Impact Factor for Iranian journals.

The Impact of Anglicizing Former German-Language Psychology Journals on Authorship and Citation Frequencies

2012 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 190-198 ◽  
Author(s):  
Günter Krampen ◽  
Thomas Huckert ◽  
Gabriel Schui
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
English Language ◽  
General Trend ◽  
Native Language ◽  
Impact Factors ◽  
German Language ◽  
Journal Articles ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Number Of Authors

Exemplary for other than English-language psychology journals, the impact of recent Anglicization of five former German-language psychology journals on (1) authorship (nationality, i.e., native language, and number of authors, i.e., single or multiple authorships), (2) formal characteristics of the journal (number of articles per volume and length of articles), and (3) number of citations of the articles in other journal articles, the language of the citing publications, and the impact factors (IF) is analyzed. Scientometric data on these variables are gathered for all articles published in the four years before anglicizing and in the four years after anglicizing the same journal. Results reveal rather quick changes: Citations per year since original articles’ publication increase significantly, and the IF of the journals go up markedly. Frequencies of citing in German-language journals decrease, citing in English-language journals increase significantly after the Anglicization of former German-language psychology journals, and there is a general trend of increasing citations in other languages as well. Side effects of anglicizing former German-language psychology journals include the publication of shorter papers, their availability to a more international authorship, and a slight, but significant increase in multiple authorships.

scholarly journals Exploring Factors Influencing Scenarios Evolution of Waste NIMBY Crisis: Analysis of Typical Cases in China

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 2006
Author(s):  
Ling He ◽  
Qing Yang ◽  
Xingxing Liu ◽  
Lingmei Fu ◽  
Jinmei Wang
Keyword(s):  
Network Theory ◽  
Development Process ◽  
Dynamic Bayesian Network ◽  
Impact Factors ◽  
Social Stability ◽  
Ground Theory ◽  
Evolution Path ◽  
Dynamic Scenario ◽  
The Impact

As the impact factors of the waste Not-In-My-Back Yard (NIMBY) crisis are complex, and the scenario evolution path of it is diverse. Once the crisis is not handled properly, it will bring adverse effects on the construction of waste NIMBY facilities, economic development and social stability. Consequently, based on ground theory, this paper takes the waste NIMBY crisis in China from 2006 to 2019 as typical cases, through coding analysis, scenario evolution factors of waste NIMBY crisis are established. Furtherly, three key scenarios were obtained, namely, external situation (E), situation state (S), emergency management (M), what is more, scenario evolution law of waste NIMBY crisis is revealed. Then, the dynamic Bayesian network theory is used to construct the dynamic scenario evolution network of waste NIMBY crisis. Finally, based on the above models, Xiantao waste NIMBY crisis is taken as a case study, and the dynamic process of scenario evolution network is visually displayed by using Netica. The simulation results show that the scenario evolution network of Xiantao waste NIMBY crisis is basically consistent with the actual incident development process, which confirms the effectiveness and feasibility of the model.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document