Abstract
The Science Citation Index, Journal Citation Reports (JCR), published by the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) and designed to rank, evaluate, categorize and compare journals, is used in a wide scientific context as a tool for evaluating researchers and research work, through the use of just one of its indicators, the impact factor. With the aim of obtaining an overall and synthetic perspective of impact factor values, we studied the frequency distributions of this indicator using the box-plot method. Using this method we divided the journals listed in the JCR into five groups (low, lower central, upper central, high and extreme). These groups position the journal in relation to its competitors. Thus, the group designated as extreme contains the journals with high impact factors which are deemed to be prestigious by the scientific community. We used the JCR data from 1996 to determine these groups, firstly for all subject categories combined (all 4779 journals) and then for each of the 183 ISI subject categories. We then substituted the indicator value for each journal by the name of the group in which it was classified. The journal group may differ from one subject category to another. In this article, we present a guide for evaluating journals constructed as described above. It provides a comprehensive and synthetic view of two of the most used sections of the JCR. It makes it possible to make more accurate and complete judgements on and through the journals, and avoids an oversimplified view of the complex reality of the world of journals. It immediately reveals the scientific subject category where the journal is best positioned. Also, whereas it used to be difficult to make intra- and interdisciplinary comparisons, this is now possible without having to consult the different sections of the JCR. We construct this guide each year using indicators published in the JCR by the ISI.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Institute For Scientific Information, 1996 Science Citation Index Journal Citation Reports; a Bibliometric Analysis of Science Journals in the ISI Database, ISI, Philadelphia, 1997, p. 151.
E. Garfield, From citation indexes to informetrics: is the tail now wagging the dog? Libri. 48 (1998) 67-80.
M.-H. Magri, A. Solari, The SCI Journal Citation Reports: a potential tool for studying journals? I. Description of the JCR journal population based on the number of citations received, number of source items, impact factor, immediacy index and cited half-life, Scientometrics, 35(1) (1996) 93-117.
M.-H. Magri, A. Solari, K. RÉrat, Les périodiques scientifiques d'audience internationale au travers du Journal Citation Reports: analyse du système d'évaluation de l'ISI. Application à l'étude de la production de l'INRA. In: L'information scientifique et technique: nouveaux enjeux documentaires et éditoriaux, Colloque INRA, Tours, 21–23 octobre, 1996, INRA Paris 1997, 71-89. Available from internet: (French version) URL: http://www.inra.fr/Internet/Unites/UCD_Jouy/scientom/magri_fr.htm (English version) URL: http://www.inra.fr/Internet/Unites/UCD_Jouy/scientom/magri_en.htm
M.-H. Magri, A. Solari, L'évaluation au travers des revues scientifiques. In: Vie, valeur et valorisation de l'information scientifique. Colloque Scicom, Nancy, 17–19 septembre 1997, Biotem Editions 1998, 225-235.
J. M. Chambers, W. S. Cleveland, B. Kleiner, P. A. Tukey, Graphical Methods for Data Analysis, Wadsworth & Brooks/Cole, Pacific Grove, 1983, p.395.
B. Escofier, J. PagÉs, Initiation aux traitements statistiques: méthodes, méthodologie, Presses Universitaires de Rennes, Rennes, 1997, p. 263.
A. Lehman, J. Sall, Distributions. In: JMP Statistics and Graphics Guide. Version 3.1. of JMP, SAS Institute, Cary, 1995, 19-41.
Anonymous, Citation data: the wrong impact? [editorial], Nature Neuroscience, 1(8) (1998) 641-642.
A. Basu, Science publication indicators for India: questions of interpretation, Scientometrics, 44(3) (1999) 347-360.
J. M. Gillis, Overuse of impact factors suppresses controversial ideas, [letter to the editor] Nature Neuroscience, 2(2) (1999) 101.
H. F. Moed, Th. N. Van Leeuwen, Improving the accuracy of Institute for Scientific Information's journal impact factors, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 46(6) (1995) 461-467.
H. F. Moed, Th. N. Van Leeuwen, Impact factors can mislead, Nature, 381(6579) (1996) 186.
S. Schwartz, J. Lopez Hellin, Measuring the impact of scientific publications. The case of the biomedical sciences, Scientometrics, 35(1) (1996) 119-132.
H. F. Moed, Th. N. Van Leeuwen, J. Reeduk, A new classification system to describe the ageing of scientific journals and their impact factors, Journal of Documentation, 54(4) (1998) 387-419.
W. GlÄnzel, A. Schubert, H.-J. Czerwon, An item-by-item subject classification of papers published in multidisciplinary and general journals using reference analysis, Scientometrics, 44(3) (1999) 427-439.
R. Rousseau, Temporal differences in self-citation rates of scientific journals, Scientometrics, 44(3) (1999) 521-531.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Solari, A., Magri, MH. A New Approach to the SCI Journal Citation Reports, a System for Evaluating Scientific Journals. Scientometrics 47, 605–625 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005680202961
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005680202961