IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/infome/v5y2011i4p698-704.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing impact factors from two different citation databases: The case of Computer Science

Author

Listed:
  • Sicilia, Miguel-Angel
  • Sánchez-Alonso, Salvador
  • García-Barriocanal, Elena

Abstract

Journal impact factors continue to play an important role in research output assessment, in spite of the criticisms and debates around them. The impact factor rankings provided in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR™) database by Thompson Reuters have enjoyed a position of monopoly for many years. But this has recently changed with the availability of the Scopus™ database and its associated journal ranking published in the Scimago Journal Rank (SJR) Web page, as the former provides a citation database with similar inclusion criteria to those used in the JCR and the latter and openly accessible impact factor-based ranking. The availability of alternatives to the JCR impact factor listings using a different citation database raises the question of the extent to which the two rankings can be considered equally valid for research evaluation purposes. This paper reports the results of a contrast of both listings in Computer Science-related topics. It attempts to answer the validity question by comparing the impact factors of journals ranked in both listings and their relative position. The results show that impact factors for journals included in both rankings are strongly correlated, with SJR impact factors in general slightly higher, confirming previous studies related to other disciplines. Nonetheless, the consideration of tercile and quartile position of journal yields some divergences for journals appearing in both rankings that need to be accounted for in research evaluation procedures.

Suggested Citation

  • Sicilia, Miguel-Angel & Sánchez-Alonso, Salvador & García-Barriocanal, Elena, 2011. "Comparing impact factors from two different citation databases: The case of Computer Science," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 698-704.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:5:y:2011:i:4:p:698-704
    DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2011.01.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157711000083
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.joi.2011.01.007?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mallig, Nicolai, 2010. "A relational database for bibliometric analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 564-580.
    2. Habibzadeh, Farrokh & Yadollahie, Mahboobeh, 2008. "Journal weighted impact factor: A proposal," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(2), pages 164-172.
    3. Serenko, Alexander, 2010. "The development of an AI journal ranking based on the revealed preference approach," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 447-459.
    4. Linda Butler, 2008. "ICT assessment: Moving beyond journal outputs," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 74(1), pages 39-55, January.
    5. López-Illescas, Carmen & de Moya-Anegón, Félix & Moed, Henk F., 2008. "Coverage and citation impact of oncological journals in the Web of Science and Scopus," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 304-316.
    6. Bouyssou, Denis & Marchant, Thierry, 2011. "Bibliometric rankings of journals based on Impact Factors: An axiomatic approach," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 75-86.
    7. Declan Butler, 2008. "Free journal-ranking tool enters citation market," Nature, Nature, vol. 451(7174), pages 6-6, January.
    8. Mallig, Nicolai, 2010. "A relational database for bibliometric analysis," Discussion Papers "Innovation Systems and Policy Analysis" 22, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    9. González-Pereira, Borja & Guerrero-Bote, Vicente P. & Moya-Anegón, Félix, 2010. "A new approach to the metric of journals’ scientific prestige: The SJR indicator," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(3), pages 379-391.
    10. Loet Leydesdorff & Ismael Rafols, 2009. "A global map of science based on the ISI subject categories," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 60(2), pages 348-362, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tânia F. G. G. Cova & Alberto A. C. C. Pais & Sebastião J. Formosinho, 2013. "Iberian universities: a characterisation from ESI rankings," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(3), pages 1239-1251, March.
    2. Cristina López-Duarte & Marta M. Vidal-Suárez & Belén González-Díaz & Nuno Rosa Reis, 2016. "Understanding the relevance of national culture in international business research: a quantitative analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(3), pages 1553-1590, September.
    3. Gorodnichenko, Yuriy & Pham, Tho & Talavera, Oleksandr, 2021. "Conference presentations and academic publishing," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 228-254.
    4. Antonio Cavacini, 2015. "What is the best database for computer science journal articles?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(3), pages 2059-2071, March.
    5. Hugo Baier-Fuentes & José M. Merigó & José Ernesto Amorós & Magaly Gaviria-Marín, 2019. "International entrepreneurship: a bibliometric overview," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 385-429, June.
    6. Hernández-Escobedo, Quetzalcoatl & Perea-Moreno, Alberto-Jesús & Manzano-Agugliaro, Francisco, 2018. "Wind energy research in Mexico," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 719-729.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gagolewski, Marek, 2011. "Bibliometric impact assessment with R and the CITAN package," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 678-692.
    2. Mingkun Wei, 2020. "Research on impact evaluation of open access journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(2), pages 1027-1049, February.
    3. Guillaume Cabanac, 2012. "Shaping the landscape of research in information systems from the perspective of editorial boards: A scientometric study of 77 leading journals," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(5), pages 977-996, May.
    4. Guillaume Cabanac, 2012. "Shaping the landscape of research in information systems from the perspective of editorial boards: A scientometric study of 77 leading journals," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(5), pages 977-996, May.
    5. Ricardo Arencibia-Jorge & Rosa Lidia Vega-Almeida & José Luis Jiménez-Andrade & Humberto Carrillo-Calvet, 2022. "Evolutionary stages and multidisciplinary nature of artificial intelligence research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(9), pages 5139-5158, September.
    6. José Álvarez-García & Amador Durán-Sánchez & María de la Cruz Del Río-Rama & Diego Fernando García-Vélez, 2018. "Active Ageing: Mapping of Scientific Coverage," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-21, December.
    7. Fernanda Morillo & Ignacio Santabárbara & Javier Aparicio, 2013. "The automatic normalisation challenge: detailed addresses identification," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(3), pages 953-966, June.
    8. Cova, Tânia F.G.G. & Jarmelo, Susana & Formosinho, Sebastião J. & de Melo, J. Sérgio Seixas & Pais, Alberto A.C.C., 2015. "Unsupervised characterization of research institutions with task-force estimation," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 59-68.
    9. Alfio Ferrara & Silvia Salini, 2012. "Ten challenges in modeling bibliographic data for bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(3), pages 765-785, December.
    10. Waltman, Ludo, 2016. "A review of the literature on citation impact indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 365-391.
    11. Liao, Chien Hsiang & Yen, Hsiuju Rebecca, 2012. "Quantifying the degree of research collaboration: A comparative study of collaborative measures," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 27-33.
    12. Guillaume Cabanac, 2013. "Experimenting with the partnership ability φ-index on a million computer scientists," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(1), pages 1-9, July.
    13. A. Abrizah & A. N. Zainab & K. Kiran & R. G. Raj, 2013. "LIS journals scientific impact and subject categorization: a comparison between Web of Science and Scopus," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(2), pages 721-740, February.
    14. Magnone, Edoardo, 2013. "A scientometric look at calendar events," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 101-108.
    15. Wang, Qi & Waltman, Ludo, 2016. "Large-scale analysis of the accuracy of the journal classification systems of Web of Science and Scopus," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 347-364.
    16. Gelsomina Catalano & Gaston García López & Alejandro Sánchez & Silvia Vignetti, 2021. "From scientific experiments to innovation: Impact pathways of a Synchrotron Light Facility," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 92(3), pages 447-472, September.
    17. Brenda Cheang & Samuel Kai Wah Chu & Chongshou Li & Andrew Lim, 2014. "OR/MS journals evaluation based on a refined PageRank method: an updated and more comprehensive review," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 100(2), pages 339-361, August.
    18. Elizabeth S. Vieira & José A. N. F. Gomes, 2011. "The journal relative impact: an indicator for journal assessment," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(2), pages 631-651, November.
    19. Carolin Michels & Ulrich Schmoch, 2012. "The growth of science and database coverage," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(3), pages 831-846, December.
    20. Zahid Halim & Shafaq Khan, 2019. "A data science-based framework to categorize academic journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(1), pages 393-423, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:5:y:2011:i:4:p:698-704. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/joi .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.