Skip to main content
Log in

The pragmatics of a diachronic journal impact factor

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

With reference to Vanclay (Scientometrics in press, 2012) the paper argues for a pragmatic approach to the Thomson-Reuter’s journal impact factor. The paper proposes and discusses to replace the current synchronous Thomson-Reuter journal impact factor by an up-to-date diachronic version (DJIF), consisting of a three-year citation window over a one year publication window. The DJIF online data collection and calculation is exemplified and compared to the present synchronous journal impact factor. The paper discusses briefly the dimensions of currency, robustness, understandability and comparability to other impact factors used in research evaluation.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In case of synchronous TRIF for logical reasons in WoS the citation window must cover the publication years in Search mode; then the citation number from the given citation year, say 2011, can be extracted from the result table of the Citation Report.

  2. In TRIF 2010 one year of citations are lacking (from 2009).

References

  • Christensen, F. H., & Ingwersen, P. (1996). Online citation analysis—A methodological approach. Scientometrics, 37(1), 39–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Egghe, L., & Rousseau, R. (1990). Introduction to informetrics. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ingwersen, P., Larsen, B., & Wormell, I. (2000). Applying diachronic citation analysis to research program evaluations. In B. Cronin & H. B. Atkins (Eds.), The web of knowledge: Festschrift for Eugene Garfield (pp. 373–388). Medford: Information Today.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ingwersen, P., Larsen, B., Rousseau, R., & Davis, M. (2001). The publication-citation matrix and its derived quantities. Chinese Science Bulletin, 46(6), 524–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moed, H. (2005). Citation analysis in research evaluation. Dordrecht: Springer.

  • Rousseau, R. (1998). Citation distribution in pure mathematics journals. In L. Egghe & R. Rousseau (Eds.), Informetrics 87/88 (pp. 249–260). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, R., & Leydesdorff, L. (2011). Simple arithmetic versus intuitive understanding: The case of the impact factor. ISSI Newsletter, 7(1), 10–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seglen, P. O. (1995). Causal relationship between article citedness and journal impact. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 45(1), 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seglen, P. O. (1997). Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluation research. British Medical Journal, 314, 498–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanclay, J. K. (2012). Impact factor: Outdated artefact or stepping-stone to journal certification? Scientometrics (in press).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter Ingwersen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ingwersen, P. The pragmatics of a diachronic journal impact factor. Scientometrics 92, 319–324 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0701-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0701-1

Keywords

Navigation