THE STRUCTURE OF IMPACT FACTOR OF ACADEMIC JOURNALS IN THE FIELD OF EDUCATION AND EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY: CITATIONS COMING FROM ARTICLES PUBLISHED BY THEIR EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS

2005 ◽  
Author(s):  
JUAN MIGUEL CAMPANARIO ◽  
LIDIA GONZALEZ ◽  
CRISTINA RODRIGUEZ
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Educational Psychology ◽  
Board Members ◽  
Academic Journals

scholarly journals Looking back and moving forward: a bibliographic survey of the Hungarian-language Orvosi Hetilap

2012 ◽  
Vol 153 (48) ◽  
pp. 1905-1917
Author(s):  
Anna Berhidi ◽  
Zsuzsa Margittai ◽  
Lívia Vasas
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Scientific Journal ◽  
Epidemiological Data ◽  
Scientific Output ◽  
Board Members ◽  
Scientific Publications ◽  
Thomson Reuters ◽  
Hungarian Language ◽  
Number Of Citations

Introduction: The first step in the process of acquisition of impact factor for a scientific journal is to get registered at Thomson Reuters Web of Science database. Aim: The aim of this article is to evaluate the content and structure of Orvosi Hetilap with regards to selection criteria of Thomson Reuters, in particular to objectives of citation analysis. Methods: Authors evaluated issues of Orvosi Hetilap published in 2011 and calculated the unofficial impact factor of the journal based on systematic search in various citation index databases. Number of citations, quality of citing journals and scientific output of the editorial board members were evaluated. Adherence to guidelines of international publishers was assessed, as well. Results: Unofficial impact factor of Orvosi Hetilap has been continuously rising every year in the past decade (except for 2004 and 2010). The articles of Orvosi Hetilap are widely cited by international authors and high impact factor journals, too. Further, more than half the articles cited are open access. The most frequently cited categories are original and review articles as well as clinical studies. Orvosi Hetilap is a weekly published journal, which is covered by many international databases such as PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Embase, and BIOSIS Previews. As regards to the scientific output of the editorial board members, the truncated mean of the number of their publications was 497, citations 2446, independent citations 2014 and h-index 21. Conclusions: While Orvosi Hetilap fulfils many criteria for getting covered by Thomson Reuters, it is worthwhile to implement a method of online citation system in order to increase the number of citations. In addition, scientific publications of all editorial board members should be made easily accessible. Finally, publications of comparative studies by multiple authors are encouraged as well as papers containing epidemiological data analyses. Orv. Hetil., 2012, 153, 1905–1917.

Editorial boards of 45 journals devoted to school and educational psychology: International characteristics and publication patterns

2019 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 110-136
Author(s):  
Jiayi Wang ◽  
John C. Begeny ◽  
Rahma M. Hida ◽  
Helen O. Oluokun
Keyword(s):  
Educational Psychology ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Board Members ◽  
Scholarly Journals ◽  
Research Directions ◽  
Editorial Boards ◽  
Publication Patterns ◽  
Key Characteristics ◽  
Future Research Directions

To assess and promote internationally representative scholarship, several past studies have examined the geographic affiliation of journals’ editorial board members and authors. The present study is the first known to examine this with journals devoted to school and educational psychology. After systematically identifying all peer-reviewed scholarly journals around the globe that are specifically devoted to school or educational psychology ( N = 45), the goals of this study were to (a) report key characteristics about each journal’s editorial board, and (b) examine the extent to which geographic affiliation (country where one is employed) is consistent among a journal’s editorial board members and recent authors. One key finding revealed that editorial boards of the discipline’s journals represent individuals from all global regions, but many global regions (e.g. Africa, Eastern Europe, Latin America) are underrepresented. Another finding showed that the vast majority of journals evidence strong similarities in geographic affiliation between editorial board members and authors. Findings, implications, limitations, and future research directions are discussed in the context of internationalization.

scholarly journals A96 GENDER DIFFERENCES IN GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY AUTHORSHIP AND EDITORIAL BOARDS

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 70-71
Author(s):  
N Jawaid ◽  
K Leung ◽  
N Bollegala
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Journal Citation Report ◽  
Senior Author ◽  
Board Members ◽  
Gender Distribution ◽  
Positive Correlation ◽  
Editorial Boards ◽  
Canadian Association ◽  
Male Dominated

Abstract Background Women are numerically under-represented in the field of gastroenterology and hepatology. Aims To characterize the gender distribution of first and senior authors and editorial board members of the highest impact factor journals in gastroenterology and hepatology. Methods Using Clarivate Journal Citation Report 2019, the 28 highest ranked journals within gastroenterology and hepatology were selected for review, along with the Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology. Publications between January 1 to December 31, 2019 were included. Gender of board members and authors was identified using publicly available data. Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated using SPSS to assess for a relationship between editorial board, first author, and senior author gender as well as impact factor. Results Of 29 journals assessed with a median impact factor of 5.55 (IQR 3.72–9.10), 357 journal issues and 8036 articles were reviewed. Three journals were headed by female chief editors, constituting 7.7% of all editors-in-chief (3/39). In total, females made up 17.1% of editorial board members (n=584). Of 8036 first authors, 2547 (31.7%) were female. Of 7335 senior authors, 1390 (19.3%) were female. There were no statistically significant correlations between impact factor and gender. Chief editor gender did not significantly correlate with gender distribution of editorial boards, first or senior authors. There was a significant positive correlation between male-dominated editorial boards and male first and senior authorship, versus a significant negative correlation between male-dominated editorial boards and female first and senior authorship. A positive correlation exists for the same gender between first and senior authors. Conclusions Although gender distribution of female first and senior authorship approaches current distributions in the field of gastroenterology and hepatology, editor-in-chief positions and editorial board membership on journals continue to be occupied by men in higher proportions. Future endeavors such as diversity statements and mentorship may help to balance these distributions in the future. Funding Agencies None

scholarly journals Academic tweeting in #ObGyn. Where do we stand?

2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (8) ◽  
pp. 867-870
Author(s):  
Ghanshyam S. Yadav ◽  
Nupur R. Nagarkatti ◽  
Sagar O. Rohondia ◽  
Hadi Erfani ◽  
Charles C. Kilpatrick ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
New England ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Board Members ◽  
Obstetrics And Gynecology ◽  
Physician Leaders ◽  
Twitter Account ◽  
And Gender ◽  
Twitter Activity

Abstract Objective To describe the scenario of academic tweeting and utilization of Twitter by editorial board members of the leading journal in obstetrics and gynecology. Methods The Twitter presence of an editorial board members of obstetrics and gynecology journal with an impact factor greater than 4 was determined. Details of their Twitter activity, year of graduation from medical school and gender were analyzed. Median SparkScore™, an online influence measure, of journals was compared to the highest impact factor journals in medicine (New England Journal of Medicine, The Lancet, The British Medical Journal and Journal of the American Medical Association). Results In the six highest impact factor journals in obstetrics and gynecology, 92 of 240 (38.3%) editorial board members had an active Twitter account. The Twitter presence of editorial members of Obstetrics and Gynecology was statistically less when compared to all other journals (P < 0.01). The median number of tweets in the last 24 h and 7 days were 0. Median SparkScore™ for the highest impact factor obstetrics and gynecology journals (24) were lower compared to the highest impact journals in medicine (66) (P = 0.03). Conclusion Editorial board members of the six highest impact factor journals in obstetrics and gynecology are not capitalizing on the dynamic nature of Twitter and its instant convenient access from our smartphones to further academia, when compared to specialties in medicine. There is a need for increased adoption of Twitter among physician leaders in the specialty.

Association of h-index of Editorial Board Members and Impact Factor among Radiology Journals

2017 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Solmaz Asnafi ◽  
Tina Gunderson ◽  
Robert J. McDonald ◽  
David F. Kallmes
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Board Members ◽  
H Index

scholarly journals CONTRIBUTION OF EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS TO JOURNAL’S SCHOLARLY OUTPUT

2021 ◽  
pp. 113-119
Author(s):  
V. N. Gureyev ◽  
N. A. Mazov ◽  
I. Yu. Ilicheva
Keyword(s):  
Editorial Policy ◽  
Publication Activity ◽  
Board Members ◽  
Publication Ethics ◽  
Scientific Quality ◽  
Academic Journals ◽  
Scholarly Output ◽  
A Share

Editorial board members (EBMs) of academic journals have been frequently studied for better understanding the principles of their functioning, impact on editorial policy, publication ethics, and entire scientific progress. One of the promising trends is to quantitatively evaluate the contribution of EBMs to the scholarly output of parent journals. This paper represents the results of the study on publication activity of editorial board members of the Russian Library and Information Science journals. To detect a share of papers by EBMs in the journal’s scholarly output, we studied a share of EBMs papers in parent journals and other sources. Generally, we detected the active participation of EBMs in increasing scholarly output of parent journals. We also studied the publication activity of foreign members of EBMs in Russian journals that turned out to bedramatically low. Formal involvement of foreign researchers to enhance the level of journal’s internationalization may explain this situation. It is shown, that the fact of publication fails to significantly impact on journal’s ranking positions. The scientific quality of EBMs papers has proved to be of higher value: in case of high quality of EBMs papers, the number of readers and citations start to increase. On the other hand, uncited papers by EBMs have the lowest or even negative effect on the journal’s rank. The findings can be of interest to editors-in-chief and founders of academic journals.

scholarly journals The h-Index of Editorial Board Members Correlates Positively With the Impact Factor of Sports Medicine Journals

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 232596711769402 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey Kay ◽  
Muzammil Memon ◽  
Darren de SA ◽  
Nicole Simunovic ◽  
Andrew Duong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
Sports Medicine ◽  
Regression Models ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Scientific Publication ◽  
Board Members ◽  
Faculty Position ◽  
H Index ◽  
The Impact

Background: The h-index is a metric widely used to present both the productivity and impact of an author’s previous publications. Purpose: To evaluate and observe any correlations among the h-indices of 2015 editorial board members from 8 top sports medicine journals. Study Design: Systematic review. Methods: The sex, country of residence, degree, and faculty position of the editorial board members were identified using their respective scientific publication profiles. The h-index and other bibliometric indicators of these editorial board members were obtained using both the Web of Science (WoS) and Google Scholar (GS) databases. Nonparametric statistics were used to analyze differences in h-index values, and regression models were used to assess the ability of the editorial board member’s h-index to predict their journal’s impact factor (IF). Results: A total of 422 editorial board members were evaluated. The median h-index of all editors was 20 (interquartile range [IQR], 19) using GS and 15 (IQR, 15) using WoS. GS h-index values were 1.19 times higher than WoS, with significant correlation between these values ( r2 = 0.88, P = .0001). Editorial board members with a PhD had significantly higher h-indices than those without (GS, P = .0007; WoS, P = .0002), and full professors had higher h-indices than associate and assistant professors (GS, P = .0001; WoS, P = .0001). Overall, there were significant differences in the distribution of the GS ( P < .0001) and WoS ( P < .0001) h-indices of the editorial board members by 2014 IF of the journals. Both the GS h-index (β coefficient, 0.01228; 95% CI, 0.01035-0.01423; P < .0001) as well as the WoS h-index (β coefficient, 0.01507; 95% CI, 0.01265-0.01749; P < .0001) of editorial board members were significant predictors of the 2014 IF of their journal. Conclusion: The h-indices of editorial board members of top sports medicine journals are significant predictors of the IF of their respective journals.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document