Casting a wide net: the Journal Impact Factor numerator

  title={Casting a wide net: the Journal Impact Factor numerator},
  author={Stephen C. Hubbard and Marie E. McVeigh},
  journal={Learned Publishing},
All metrics published in the Journal Citation Reports™ are dependent on the complete and correct aggregation of citations to each journal title. Here, we explain how unique cited titles are created for Thomson Reuters indexing, and how variations and ambiguities in titles are collected in order to create the Journal Impact Factor numerator. 
Comments on a critique of the Thomson Reuters journal impact factor
We discuss research evaluation, the nature of impact, and the use of the Thomson Reuters journal impact factor and other indicators in scientometrics in the light of recent commentary.
CiteScore metrics: Creating journal metrics from the Scopus citation index
CiteScore was developed to implement familiar calculations but make them more comprehensive and transparent and to complement existing information to allow for comparison and evaluation.
The Journal Impact Factor as a performance indicator
The Journal Impact Factor is the most commonly applied metric for evaluation of scientific output. It is a journalfocused indicator that shows the attention a journal attracts. It does not
Evaluating the quality of a journal: JCEHP's 2010 impact factor.
  • C. Olson
  • Business
    The Journal of continuing education in the health professions
  • 2011
The editorial office recently received notice of JCEHP’s 2010 impact factor: 2.575. This number represents a significant increase over previous years (TABLE 1) and is cause for measured celebration.
The Journal Impact Factor: A brief history, critique, and discussion of adverse effects
This chapter provides a brief history of the indicator and highlights well-known limitations-such as the asymmetry between the numerator and the denominator, differences across disciplines, the insufficient citation window, and the skewness of the underlying citation distributions.
Analysis of Publications on Journal Impact Factor Over Time
The purpose of the analysis is to make a start of studying part of the field of quantitative science studies that relates to the most famous and classic bibliometric indicator around, and see what characteristics apply to the research on Journal Impact Factors.
Ranking Faculties, Ph.D. Programs, Individual Scholars, and Influential Articles in Accounting Information Systems Based on Citations to Publications in the Journal of Information Systems
A correlation analysis between the four citation metrics and the number of articles published in JIS provides evidence that counting articles published is a reasonable method and suggests that JIS's impact has consistently improved over time.
Citation Analysis of Advances in Management Accounting: The First 20 Volumes
This study assesses the success of the first 20 volumes of Advances in Management Accounting using citation analysis using Google Scholar and determines the top 20 authors, faculties, and doctoral programs for each citation metric.


Modifying the journal impact factor by fractional citation weighting: The audience factor
A new approach to the field normalization of the classical journal impact factor is introduced. This approach, called the audience factor, takes into consideration the citing propensity of journals
The journal impact factor denominator: defining citable (counted) items.
This journal-specific analysis identifies the journal sections, subsections, or both that contain materials likely to be considered scholarly works, and which therefore have the potential to be cited.
Scopus's Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) versus a Journal Impact Factor based on Fractional Counting of Citations
Fractional counting of citations can be contextualized at the paper level and aggregated impacts of sets can be tested for their significance, and it can be shown that the weighted impact of Annals of Mathematics is not so much lower than that of Molecular Cell despite a five-f old difference.
The impact factor, total citations, and better citation mouse traps: A commentary
This communication comments upon the article “Measuring the Utility of Journals in the Crime-Psychology Field: Beyond the Impact Factor” by Walters (2006), recently published in JASIST. Walters'
Definition and identification of journals as bibliographic and subject entities: Librarianship versus ISI Journal Citation Reports methods and their effect on citation measures
This paper explores the ISI Journal Citation Reports (JCR) bibliographic and subject structures through Library of Congress (LC) and American research libraries cataloging and classification
Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research
Alternative methods for evaluating research are being sought, such as citation rates and journal impact factors, which seem to be quantitative and objective indicators directly related to published science.
Making an equality of ISI impact factors for different subject fields
A new mathematical index entitled Impact Factor Point Average (IFPA) is proposed for assessment of the quality of individual research work in different subject fields based on a normalization of differences in impact factors, rankings, and number of journal titles in differentsubject fields.
Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation.
In 1971, the Institute for Scientfic Information decided to undertake a systematic analysis of journal citation patterns across the whole of science and technology.
The impact factor for evaluating scientists: the good, the bad and the ugly
  • G. Lippi
  • Economics
    Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine
  • 2009
The IF represents the tool used by most for assigning resources by grant-funding bodies, to measure (and compare) the success of scientists, despite the fact that the IF was designed to apply to journals only and not to individual articles or individual scientists.