Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Journal report card

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

    We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

    Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

An Erratum to this article was published on 22 June 2012

Abstract

The impact factor is one of the most used scientometric indicators. Its proper and improper uses have been discussed extensively before. It has been criticized extensively, yet it is still here. In this paper I propose the journal report card, which is a set of measures, each with an easily comprehensible meaning that provides a fuller picture of the journals’ standing. The set of measures in the report card include the impact factor, the h-index, number of citations at different points on the ranked list of citations, extent of uncitedness and coverage of the h-core. The report card is computed for two sets of journals, the top-20 journals in JCR 2010 and the top-20 journals in JCR 2010 for the category Information and Library Science.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Australian Research Council (no date). Ranked outlets. Retrieved from http://www.arc.gov.au/era/era_2010/archive/era_journal_list.htm.

  • Bar-Ilan, J. (2010). Rankings of information and library science journals by JIF and by h-type indices. Journal of Informetrics, 4, 141–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bergstrom, C. (2007). Eigenfactor—Measuring the value and prestige of scholarly journals. College and Research Libraries News, 68(5), 314–316.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bollen, J., Rodriguez, M. A., & Van de Sompel, H. (2006). Journal status. Scientometrics, 69(3), 669–687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braun, T., Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2006). A Hirsch-type index for journals. Scientometrics, 69(1), 169–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brin, S., & Page, L. (1996). The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual Web search engine. Computer Networks and ISDN Systems, 30(1–7), 107–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Centre for Science and Technology Studies (2011). Methodology. Retrieved from http://www.leidenranking.com/methodology.aspx.

  • Egghe, L. (2006). The theory and practice of the g-index. Scientometrics, 69(1), 131–152.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • ESF (2012). ERIH foreword. Retrieved from http://www.esf.org/research-areas/humanities/erih-european-reference-index-for-the-humanities/erih-foreword.html.

  • eigenfactor.org (no date). Eigenfactor score and article influence score: Detailed methods. Retrieved from http://www.eigenfactor.org/methods.pdf.

  • González-Pereira, B., Guerrero-Bote, V. P., & Moya-Anegón, F. (2009). The SJR indicator: A new indicator of journals’ scientific prestige. Retrieved from http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0912/0912.4141.pdf.

  • Harzing, A. W. K., & van der Wal, R. (2009). A Google Scholar h-index for journals: An alternative metric to measure journal impact in economics & business? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(1), 41–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ingwersen, P., Larsen, B., & Wormell, I. (2000). Applying diachronic citation analysis to research program evaluation. In B. Cronin & H. Barsky Atkins (Eds.), The web of knowledge. A Festschrift in honor of Eugene Garfield (pp. 373–387). Medford: Information Today.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moed, H. F. (2010). Measuring contextual citation impact of scientific journals. Journal of Informetrics, 4(3), 265–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moed, H. F., & van Leeuwen, T. N. (1995). Improving the accuracy of institute for scientific information’s journal impact factors. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 46(6), 461–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moed, H. F., & van Leeuwen, T. N. (1996). Impact factors can mislead. Nature, 381(6579), 186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinski, G., & Narin, F. (1976). Citation influence for journal aggregates of scientific publications: Theory, with application to the literature of physics. Information Processing and Management, 12, 297–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanclay, J. K. (2012). Impact factor: outdated artefact or stepping-stone to journal certification? Scientometrics. doi:10.1007/s11192-011-0561-0.

  • Zitt, M. (2010). Citing-side normalization of journal impact: A robust variant of the Audience Factor. Journal of Informetrics, 4(3), 392–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zitt, M., & Small, H. (2008). Modifying the journal impact factor by fractional citation weighting: The audience factor. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(11), 1856–1860.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Information Science, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, 52900, Israel

    Judit Bar-Ilan

Authors
  1. Judit Bar-Ilan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Judit Bar-Ilan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bar-Ilan, J. Journal report card. Scientometrics 92, 249–260 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0671-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0671-3

Keywords