Indeed: real world (and long term) impact ought to be considered and not only bibliometrics.
It's great to see such considered and expert discussion on this list!
It is my perspective that authors are under pressure to publish in high impact journals. However, authors targeting high impact journals are not necessarily going to contribute to a University's bibliometrics score or ranking. Is it not a question of whether the articles themselves are cited?
Best wishes,
Jenny Delasalle
Academic Support Manager (Research)
University of Warwick Library
Gibbet Hill Road
Coventry CV4 7AL
United Kingdom
Tel: (+44) (0) 2476 15 12 75
My blog: http://blogs.warwick.ac.uk/libresearch
Library Support for Research: http://go.warwick.ac.uk/lib-researchers
Submit your work to WRAP: http://go.warwick.ac.uk/irsubmit
> -----Original Message-----
> From: A bibliometrics discussion list for the Library and Research
> Community [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Dick
> Hartley
> Sent: 22 December 2010 10:33
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Where academics publish
>
> Academics in many disciplines are faced with the serious issue of
> whether to publish in the journal with the highest possible
> impact factor or to publish in a "less prestigious" journal which is
> read by practitioners whose work might be somehow changed as
> a result of reading the research.
>
> See the RIN report Communicating Knowledge
> (http://www.rin.ac.uk/our-work/communicating-and-disseminating-
> research/communicating-knowledge-how-and-why-researchers-pu )
> and the detail in the related working papers.
>
> Dick Hartley
>
>
>
>
>
> Dick Hartley
> Professor of Information Science
> Director, The Institute for Humanities and Social Science Research
> Manchester Metropolitan University
> Manchester
> M15 6LL
> Tel: +44 161 247 6139
> Fax:+44 161 247 6351
> email: [log in to unmask]
>
> Before acting on this email or opening any attachments you should read
> the
> Manchester Metropolitan University's email disclaimer available on its
> website
> http://www.mmu.ac.uk/emaildisclaimer
> >>> LIS-BIBLIOMETRICS automatic digest system <[log in to unmask]>
> 22/12/2010 00:00 >>>
> There are 2 messages totaling 315 lines in this issue.
>
> Topics of the day:
>
> 1. Alternative sources of journal quality metrics
> 2. quality of a journal & impact factor
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 15:59:21 +1000
> From: Paula Callan <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Alternative sources of journal quality metrics
>
> Hi everyone
>
> When choosing a journal (for article submission), authors may need to
> consider other factors such as;
>
> - How likely they are be published in a high impact factor journal?
> For some, it may be more appropriate to aim for a lower tier
> journal to build up a body of work and esteem first.
> - What is the time from submission to publication? Publishers vary in
> this regard, and some have a long peer review process
> and/or a lag between acceptance and publication. If claiming priority
> on the idea is important, it may be wise to select a journal
> that has a speedy submission to publication process.
> - Do they want/need to provide an open access copy of the article? If
> yes, they will need to check each publishers policy on
> self-archiving and Open Access? This information is usually available
> on the publisher's website or you can check the
> Sherpa/RoMEO and OAKList databases.
>
> While we do advise researchers on how to check a journal's impact
> factor via WoK, we also suggest they consult other sources of
> information including:
>
> 1. Scimago (FREE)
> Scimago used Google's PageRank algorithm (as an indicator of 'journal
> influence') to ranks journals. It also provides an H index
> and data on total number of citable doc and total number of cites over
> the past 3 years.
> http://www.scimagojr.com/
>
> 2. Sciverse Journal Analyzer
> This product uses two main metrics (SJR-Scimago Journal Rank and SNIP-
> Source Normalized Impact per Paper) to rate the quality of
> a journal. You can select up to 10 journals in a specific field and
> the results are uploaded into graphs, making it easy to see
> how journals are performing relative to each other.
> http://www.info.sciverse.com/scopus/scopus-in-
> detail/tools/journalanalyzer/
>
> 3. The Australian ERA Journal List (FREE)
> The list was produced by the Australian Research Council based on
> submissions from individual Australian researchers and the
> major peak bodies representing the disciplines. There are over 20,000
> journals in the list covering all disciplines. The journals
> (which must be peer reviewed) have been ranked in discipline-specific
> tiers of A*, A , B, C. Getting published by an A* or A
> ranked journal is considered to be an indicator of quality/impact for
> the purpose of the Australian research assessment initiative
> (ERA). The current list (which will be reviewed in 2011) can be
> downloaded in XLS format.
> http://www.arc.gov.au/era/era_journal_list.htm#1
>
> 4. JANE (FREE)
> The "Journal Author Name Estimator" allows you to enter your keywords
> or the title of your article and it then will suggest a
> list of journals that are a good match for the topic.
>
>
> p.s. Weather here in Australia is crazy too. While most of the country
> is experiencing locust plagues, wild storms and flooding
> rains, other parts have just had summer snow!
>
> Merry Christmas
>
> Paula
>
>
> **************************************************************
> Paula Callan BA (UQ), GradDipLib&InfoSys (QUT), GCEd (Higher) (QUT)
> e-Research Access Coordinator
> Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia
> CRICOS No. 00213J
> Email: [log in to unmask] Ph: (07) 3138 8336
> Location: V704 Library (Gardens Point Campus)
> http://eprints.qut.edu.au
>
> Publications
> http://eprints.qut.edu.au/view/person/Callan,_Paula.html
> ***************************************************************
> "You see, I don't believe that libraries should be drab places where
> people sit in silence, and that's been the main reason for
> our policy of employing wild animals as librarians." Monty Python's
> Flying Circus
>
> ***********************************************************************
> **********
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: A bibliometrics discussion list for the Library and Research
> Community [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
> Of LIS-BIBLIOMETRICS automatic digest system
> Sent: Tuesday, 21 December 2010 10:03 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: LIS-BIBLIOMETRICS Digest - 13 Dec 2010 to 20 Dec 2010 (#2010-
> 6)
>
> There are 4 messages totaling 1427 lines in this issue.
>
> Topics of the day:
>
> 1. quality of a journal & impact factor (4)
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2010 12:28:58 -0000
> From: "Delasalle, Jenny" <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: quality of a journal & impact factor
>
> Dear all,
>
>
>
> I hope you're all keeping safe and warm in our glorious winter weather!
>
>
>
> I've been thinking some about advice to researchers about selecting
> journals to approach for publication. What measures of journal quality
> exist and are used, and are we using them correctly? Most of us would
> think of the impact factor and most often when we say that, we would
> mean the two year one on WoK, but WoK doesn't cover all journals and
> there are other kinds of impact factors, and indeed other indicators of
> journal quality.
>
>
>
> Are there any other sources folks here would recommend than WoK's 2
> year
> IF? Is this in general or for particular disciplines?
>
>
>
> I attended the bibliometrics training offered by Mimas in the Autumn
> and
> learnt that the 5 year IF could be a better way to compare journal
> titles across different disciplines but I still feel that there is a
> lot
> more I could learn about how to use impact factors appropriately...
>
>
>
> Season's greetings!
>
>
>
> Jen
>
>
>
> Jenny Delasalle
> Academic Support Manager (Research)
>
> University of Warwick Library
> Gibbet Hill Road
> Coventry CV4 7AL
> United Kingdom
>
> Tel: (+44) (0) 2476 15 12 75
>
> My blog: http://blogs.warwick.ac.uk/libresearch
> <http://blogs.warwick.ac.uk/libresearch>
> Library Support for Research: http://go.warwick.ac.uk/lib-researchers
> <http://go.warwick.ac.uk/lib-researchers%20>
> Submit your work to WRAP: http://go.warwick.ac.uk/irsubmit
> <http://go.warwick.ac.uk/irsubmit>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2010 13:44:44 +0100
> From: "Gerritsma, Wouter" <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: quality of a journal & impact factor
>
> Jenny and others,
>
> Even within ISI the 5 year IF should not be overlooked. When optimizing
> for maximum citations the 5 year IF is a better table
> than the classic 2 years IF. But next to that there has been for some
> time already the Scimago Journal Rank at
> http://www.scimagojr.com/ which has very informative graphics per
> journal for all journals covered by Scopus. Some 16,000.
> Elsevier has come with the site http://journalmetrics.com and provides
> beside the ScimagoJR also the SNIP indicator. The latter is
> relatively new, and was devised by Henk Moed formerly with CWTS
>
> All the best
> Wouter
>
> ___________________________________________
> Wouter Gerritsma
> Bibliometrician
> Wageningen UR Library
> PO box 9100
> 6700 HA Wageningen
> The Netherlands
>
> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> http://library.wur.nl/
> tel +31 317 483052
>
> Publishing tips: http://tinyurl.com/39opsf3
>
>
>
>
> From: A bibliometrics discussion list for the Library and Research
> Community [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
> Of Delasalle, Jenny
> Sent: maandag 20 december 2010 13:29
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: quality of a journal & impact factor
>
> Dear all,
>
> I hope you're all keeping safe and warm in our glorious winter weather!
>
> I've been thinking some about advice to researchers about selecting
> journals to approach for publication. What measures of
> journal quality exist and are used, and are we using them correctly?
> Most of us would think of the impact factor and most often
> when we say that, we would mean the two year one on WoK, but WoK
> doesn't cover all journals and there are other kinds of impact
> factors, and indeed other indicators of journal quality.
>
> Are there any other sources folks here would recommend than WoK's 2
> year IF? Is this in general or for particular disciplines?
>
> I attended the bibliometrics training offered by Mimas in the Autumn
> and learnt that the 5 year IF could be a better way to
> compare journal titles across different disciplines but I still feel
> that there is a lot more I could learn about how to use
> impact factors appropriately...
>
> Season's greetings!
>
> Jen
>
> Jenny Delasalle
> Academic Support Manager (Research)
> University of Warwick Library
> Gibbet Hill Road
> Coventry CV4 7AL
> United Kingdom
> Tel: (+44) (0) 2476 15 12 75
> My blog: http://blogs.warwick.ac.uk/libresearch
> Library Support for Research: http://go.warwick.ac.uk/lib-researchers
> <http://go.warwick.ac.uk/lib-researchers%20>
> Submit your work to WRAP: http://go.warwick.ac.uk/irsubmit
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2010 15:45:36 +0000
> From: Claire Parry <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: quality of a journal & impact factor
>
> There's an interesting discussion of weighted metrics, real-time usage
> data and other factors in this article:
>
> http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/12/17/scholars_develop_new_metr
> ics_for_journals_impact
>
> Claire
> ________________________________
> From: A bibliometrics discussion list for the Library and Research
> Community [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
> Of Delasalle, Jenny
> Sent: 20 December 2010 12:29
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: quality of a journal & impact factor
>
> Dear all,
>
> I hope you're all keeping safe and warm in our glorious winter weather!
>
> I've been thinking some about advice to researchers about selecting
> journals to approach for publication. What measures of
> journal quality exist and are used, and are we using them correctly?
> Most of us would think of the impact factor and most often
> when we say that, we would mean the two year one on WoK, but WoK
> doesn't cover all journals and there are other kinds of impact
> factors, and indeed other indicators of journal quality.
>
> Are there any other sources folks here would recommend than WoK's 2
> year IF? Is this in general or for particular disciplines?
>
> I attended the bibliometrics training offered by Mimas in the Autumn
> and learnt that the 5 year IF could be a better way to
> compare journal titles across different disciplines but I still feel
> that there is a lot more I could learn about how to use
> impact factors appropriately...
>
> Season's greetings!
>
> Jen
>
> Jenny Delasalle
> Academic Support Manager (Research)
> University of Warwick Library
> Gibbet Hill Road
> Coventry CV4 7AL
> United Kingdom
> Tel: (+44) (0) 2476 15 12 75
> My blog: http://blogs.warwick.ac.uk/libresearch
> Library Support for Research: http://go.warwick.ac.uk/lib-researchers
> <http://go.warwick.ac.uk/lib-researchers%20>
> Submit your work to WRAP: http://go.warwick.ac.uk/irsubmit
>
> ***********************************************************************
> *******************************************************************
> The contents of this email are confidential and/or privileged
> information intended for the addressee only. If you are
> not the addressee, or the person responsible for delivering it to the
> addressee, you may not copy or disclose this
> information to anyone else. This email may contain personal views which
> are not the views of Chatham House. If
> you have received this email in error, please delete it from your
> system. Save paper - do you need to print this
> email?
> ***********************************************************************
> *******************************************************************
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 08:56:00 +1000
> From: Keith Webster <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: quality of a journal & impact factor
>
> Another, entirely different, take is the ranked journal list developed
> by the Australian Research council for ERA, our version of
> the RAE/REF.
>
> In this process, the ARC worked with research communities to rank
> something in the region of 19,000 journal titles into one of
> four rankings: A*, A, B and C. The list has had some criticism, mostly
> due to a purported under-rating of Australian titles but,
> to a large extent, it has served the purpose - to provide an indication
> of the international standing of a vast range of
> peer-reviewed titles. I don't know if anyone has tried to correlate
> this with an IF or with SNIP, but it may offer an alternative
> view. Each title is also allocated to between one and three Fields of
> Research codes - an Australian research version of the UK
> SIC.
>
> You can find the 2010 list at
> http://www.arc.gov.au/era/era_journal_list.htm
>
> There, you will also find a ranked conference list which offers a
> similar ranking for major peer-review conferences.
>
> A health warning: 2010 was the first year of ERA in its entirety and
> the ARC has indicated that the ranked lists will be reviewed
> in 2011, and we can only presume that there may be some changes.
>
> Sitting here in an Australian summer, I can't say that I miss British
> winters too much!
>
> Keith Webster
>
> University Librarian and Director of Learning Services
> The University of Queensland
>
>
>
> On 21/12/2010, at 1:45 AM, Claire Parry wrote:
>
> There’s an interesting discussion of weighted metrics, real-time usage
> data and other factors in this article:
>
> http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/12/17/scholars_develop_new_metr
> ics_for_journals_impact
>
> Claire
> From: A bibliometrics discussion list for the Library and Research
> Community [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
> Of Delasalle, Jenny
> Sent: 20 December 2010 12:29
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: quality of a journal & impact factor
>
> Dear all,
>
> I hope you’re all keeping safe and warm in our glorious winter weather!
>
> I’ve been thinking some about advice to researchers about selecting
> journals to approach for publication. What measures of
> journal quality exist and are used, and are we using them correctly?
> Most of us would think of the impact factor and most often
> when we say that, we would mean the two year one on WoK, but WoK
> doesn’t cover all journals and there are other kinds of impact
> factors, and indeed other indicators of journal quality.
>
> Are there any other sources folks here would recommend than WoK’s 2
> year IF? Is this in general or for particular disciplines?
>
> I attended the bibliometrics training offered by Mimas in the Autumn
> and learnt that the 5 year IF could be a better way to
> compare journal titles across different disciplines but I still feel
> that there is a lot more I could learn about how to use
> impact factors appropriately…
>
> Season’s greetings!
>
> Jen
>
> Jenny Delasalle
> Academic Support Manager (Research)
> University of Warwick Library
> Gibbet Hill Road
> Coventry CV4 7AL
> United Kingdom
> Tel: (+44) (0) 2476 15 12 75
> My blog: http://blogs.warwick.ac.uk/libresearch
> Library Support for Research: http://go.warwick.ac.uk/lib-researchers
> Submit your work to WRAP: http://go.warwick.ac.uk/irsubmit
>
> ***********************************************************************
> *******************************************************************
> The contents of this email are confidential and/or privileged
> information intended for the addressee only. If you are
> not the addressee, or the person responsible for delivering it to the
> addressee, you may not copy or disclose this
> information to anyone else. This email may contain personal views which
> are not the views of Chatham House. If
> you have received this email in error, please delete it from your
> system. Save paper - do you need to print this
> email?
> ***********************************************************************
> *******************************************************************
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of LIS-BIBLIOMETRICS Digest - 13 Dec 2010 to 20 Dec 2010 (#2010-6)
> **********************************************************************
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 09:03:28 +0000
> From: Joanna Ball <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: quality of a journal & impact factor
>
> There's also the European Research Index for the Humanities:
> <http://www.esf.org/research-areas/humanities/erih-european-reference-
> index-for-the-humanities.html>
>
> This aims to act as a bibliometric tool for the humanities, and there
> are
> currently 14 lists for different subjects, each categorising journals
> as A,
> B and C.
>
> We've started to use this within the Library as a tool for collection
> management where impact factors don't apply, and have also found that
> some
> of our researchers already make use of it.
>
> Joanna
> ------------------------
> Joanna Ball
> Research Liaison Manager
> The Library, University of Sussex,
> Brighton BN1 9QL
> Tel. +44 (0)1273 872746 Email:[log in to unmask]
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of LIS-BIBLIOMETRICS Digest - 20 Dec 2010 to 21 Dec 2010 (#2010-7)
> **********************************************************************
|
