Persistent Underrepresentation of Women’s Science in High Profile Journals

AbstractYiqin Alicia Shen, Jason M. Webster, Yuichi Shoda, and Ione Fine Department of Psychology, University of Washington Past research has demonstrated an under-representation of female editors and reviewers in top scientific journals, but less is known about the representation of women authors within original research articles. We collected research article publication records from 15 high-profile multidisciplinary and neuroscience journals for 2005-2017 and analyzed the representation of women over time, as well as its relationship with journal impact factor. We find that women authors have been persistently underrepresented in high-profile journals. This under-representation has persisted over more than a decade, with glacial improvement over time. Even within our limited group of high profile journals, the percent of female first and last authors is negatively associated with journal impact factor. Since publishing in high-profile journals is a gateway to academic success, this underrepresentation of women may contribute to the lack of women at the top of the academic ladder.

Download Full-text

Analysis of Publications on Journal Impact Factor Over Time

Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics ◽

10.3389/frma.2017.00004 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 2 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Thed N. van Leeuwen ◽

Paul F. Wouters

Keyword(s):

Impact Factor ◽

Journal Impact Factor ◽

Journal Impact ◽

Over Time

Download Full-text

ASSESSMENT OF QUALITY OF JOURNALS AND ARTICLES FOR RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS

INDIAN DRUGS ◽

10.53879/id.49.06.p0005 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 49 (06) ◽

pp. 5-11

Author(s):

H Avasarala ◽

◽

S. K Dinakaran ◽

K. R. Vinod ◽

S. Sandhya ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Impact Factor ◽

Present Article ◽

Journal Impact Factor ◽

Standard Setting ◽

Research Articles ◽

Original Research ◽

Evaluation Tools ◽

Journal Impact ◽

Setting Parameters

Currently the worth of original research articles and reviews is being estimated by the quality of journal which selects the article for publication. The best the journal is cited, the better it moves into the researchers mind and thus it has a good impact factor depending on the citation. The present article helps to assess a journal and choose frequently cited journal. Impact Factor (IF), Index Copernicus (IC)and SC Imago Journal and Country Rank (SJR) are discussed. The various evaluation tools that set the standards are listed with method for calculate the standard setting parameters. This article may help to choose the apt journal for work of choice.

Download Full-text

A Journal-Level Analysis of Progress in Transplantation

Progress in Transplantation ◽

10.1177/1526924817746914 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 28 (1) ◽

pp. 19-23

Author(s):

Thomas Feeley ◽

Seyoung Lee ◽

Shin-Il Moon

Keyword(s):

Impact Factor ◽

Journal Impact Factor ◽

Kidney Diseases ◽

Journal Article ◽

Impact Factors ◽

Journal Citation Reports ◽

Journal Impact ◽

Surgery Journals ◽

Over Time ◽

Journal Citation

Context: Citations to articles published in academic journals represent a proxy for influence in bibliometrics. Objective: To measure the journal impact factor for Progress in Transplantation over time and to also identify related journals indexed in transplantation and surgery. Design: Data from Journal Citation Reports (ISI web of science) were used to rank Progress in Transplantation compared to peer journals using journal impact and journal relatedness measures. Social network analysis was used to measure relationships between pairs of journals in Progress in Transplantation’s relatedness network. Main Outcome Measures: Journal impact factor and journal relatedness. Results: Data from 2010 through 2015 indicate the average journal article in PIT was cited 0.87 times (standard deviation [SD] = 0.12) and this estimate was stable over time. Progress in Transplantation most often cited American Journal of Transplantation, Transplantation, American Journal of Kidney Diseases, and Liver Transplantation. In terms of cited data, the journal was most often referenced by Clinical Transplantation, Transplant International, and Current Opinion in Organ Transplantation. Conclusion: The journal is listed both in surgery and transplantation categories of Journal Citation Reports and its impact factors over time fare better with surgery journals than with transplant journals. Network data using betweenness centrality indicate Progress in Transplantation links transplantation-focused journals and journals indexed in health sciences categories.

Download Full-text

Characteristics and Research Techniques Associated with the Journal Impact Factor and Other Key Metrics in Pharmacology Journals

Computation ◽

10.3390/computation9110116 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 9 (11) ◽

pp. 116

Author(s):

Mingkwan Na Takuathung ◽

Wannachai Sakuludomkan ◽

Supanimit Teekachunhatean ◽

Nut Koonrungsesomboon

Keyword(s):

Impact Factor ◽

Journal Impact Factor ◽

Molecular Techniques ◽

Research Articles ◽

Original Research ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Research Techniques ◽

Journal Impact ◽

Research Studies

In the present age, there is intense pressure on researchers to publish their research in ‘high-impact factor’ journals. It would be interesting to understand the trend of research publications in the field of pharmacology by exploring the characteristics of research articles, including research techniques, in relation to the journal’s key bibliometrics, particularly journal impact factor (JIF), the seemingly most mentioned metric. This study aimed to determine the characteristics and research techniques in relation to research articles in pharmacology journals with higher or lower JIF values. A cross-sectional study was conducted on primary research journals under the ‘Pharmacology and Pharmacy’ category. Analysis of 768 original research articles across 32 journals (with an average JIF of 2.565 ± 0.887) demonstrated that research studies involving molecular techniques, in vivo experiments on animals, and bioinformatics and computational modeling were significantly associated with a higher JIF value of the journal in which such contributions were published. Our analysis suggests that research studies involving such techniques/approaches are more likely to be published in higher-ranked pharmacology journals.

Download Full-text

Analysis of the journal impact factor and related bibliometric indicators in education and educational research category

Education for Information ◽

10.3233/efi-200442 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-22

Author(s):

Metin Orbay ◽

Orhan Karamustafaoğlu ◽

Ruben Miranda

Keyword(s):

Impact Factor ◽

Educational Research ◽

Journal Impact Factor ◽

Impact Factors ◽

Bibliometric Indicators ◽

Strongly Correlated ◽

Starting Point ◽

Consistent Assessment ◽

The Impact ◽

Journal Impact

This study analyzes the journal impact factor and related bibliometric indicators in Education and Educational Research (E&ER) category, highlighting the main differences among journal quartiles, using Web of Science (Social Sciences Citation Index, SSCI) as the data source. High impact journals (Q1) publish only slightly more papers than expected, which is different to other areas. The papers published in Q1 journal have greater average citations and lower uncitedness rates compared to other quartiles, although the differences among quartiles are lower than in other areas. The impact factor is only weakly negative correlated (r=-0.184) with the journal self-citation but strongly correlated with the citedness of the median journal paper (r= 0.864). Although this strong correlation exists, the impact factor is still far to be the perfect indicator for expected citations of a paper due to the high skewness of the citations distribution. This skewness was moderately correlated with the citations received by the most cited paper of the journal (r= 0.649) and the number of papers published by the journal (r= 0.484), but no important differences by journal quartiles were observed. In the period 2013–2018, the average journal impact factor in the E&ER has increased largely from 0.908 to 1.638, which is justified by the field growth but also by the increase in international collaboration and the share of papers published in open access. Despite their inherent limitations, the use of impact factors and related indicators is a starting point for introducing the use of bibliometric tools for objective and consistent assessment of researcher.

Download Full-text