To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Top Ranking Journals.
Journal articles on the topic 'Top Ranking Journals'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Top Ranking Journals.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Howard, Louise, and Greg Wilkinson. "Impact factors of psychiatric journals." British Journal of Psychiatry 170, no. 2 (1997): 109–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1192/bjp.170.2.109.
Full textAbstract:
BackgroundWe examined citation data for the British Journal of Psychiatry (BJP) and four other general psychiatry journals to assess their impact on the scientific community.MethodData on three measures of citations (total number of citations, impact factor and ranking by impact factor) were obtained from Journal Citation Reports for 1985–1994. Rank correlations from year to year were calculated.ResultsThe BJP currently ranks sixth of all psychiatry journals when journals are ranked by impact factor. The journal's impact factor fell between 1985 and 1990 and this was followed by a rise in impact factor after 1991. The BJP did not rank in the top 10 psychiatry journals between 1991 and 1993. Archives of General Psychiatry is cited more frequently than any other psychiatry journal, with the American Journal of Psychiatry usually ranking second. Psychopharmacology journals are replacing more general journals in the top rankings. Rankings of most journals have become less stable in recent years.ConclusionsThe BJP would have to change the nature and number of papers published to improve its impact factor. There are a number of limitations to citation data and such data are only one of several factors useful in evaluating the importance of a journal's contribution to scientific and clinical communities.Conflict of interestThese condauthor is Editor of the British Journal of Psychiatry.
2
Barrick, John A., Nathan W. Mecham, Scott L. Summers, and David A. Wood. "Ranking Accounting Journals by Topical Area and Methodology." Journal of Information Systems 33, no. 2 (2017): 1–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.2308/isys-51981.
Full textAbstract:
ABSTRACT This paper presents rankings of accounting journals disaggregated by topical area (AIS, audit, financial, managerial, tax, and other) and methodology (analytical, archival, experimental, and other). We find that only for the financial topical area and archival methodology does the traditional top-3 characterization of the best journals accurately describe what journals publish the most-cited work. For all other topic areas and methodologies, the top-3 characterization does not describe what journals publish the most-cited work. For only analytical research does the traditional top-6 journal characterization accurately describe what journals publish the most-cited work. In AIS, the traditional top-3/-6 journals are even less representative, as only one traditional top-3 journal is listed among the six journals publishing the most-cited AIS work, and only three of the traditional top-6 journals are in this list. In addition to creating journal rankings using citations, we create rankings using a unique measure of the attention given by stakeholders outside of the academy. With this measure we find similar results; the traditional top journals are not publishing the articles that receive the most attention in some topical areas. The results call into question whether individuals and institutions should rely solely on the traditional top-3/-6 journal lists for evaluating research productivity and impact. JEL Classifications: M4; M40; M41; M42; M49. Data Availability: Requests for data may be made to the authors.
3
Kao, Erin H., Chuan-Hao Hsu, Yunlin Lu, and Hung-Gay Fung. "Ranking of finance journals: a stochastic dominance analysis." Managerial Finance 42, no. 4 (2016): 312–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/mf-04-2015-0125.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose – Prior studies in citation-based journal rankings tend to be static to compare across journals. One journal may be judged better in citations than other journals at some points in time but not at the others. The assumption that the citation distribution is normally distributed and that the citation observations are independent and identically distributed (i.i.d.) may not be appropriate. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach – This study uses a stochastic dominance (SD) analysis, which overcomes the dynamic nature of changes in citation over time. The SD method proposed by Linton, Maasoumi, and Whang (hereafter LMW, 2005) does not require the data to be i.i.d. We use the LMW method to compare the relative ranking of 23 finance journals using citations for all articles from them during 1990-2010. Findings – The study indicates that the citation distribution changes over time. Thus a SD analysis is a better approach for a comparison of journal ranking. The findings unambiguously place JF, JFE, RFS, JFQA, and JFI in the top five spots of the finance journal ranking. The “near-top” journals, such as JBF, JCF, and FM, are not clear cut in the SD analysis. Research limitations/implications – The results confirm that ranking for the lower ranked journals may change over time especially, but the top three journals appear to be robust across methods and over time. Originality/value – The results of SD analysis provides more convincing evidence on finance journal ranking and could be useful to rank academic institutions, faculty research quality, and help the authors to decide what to read and which journals are influential.
4
Linton, Jonathan D. "Identifying the top ranking business journals." Technovation 33, no. 2-3 (2013): 25–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2012.12.003.
Full text
5
Linton, Jonathan D. "Updating the top ranking business journals." Technovation 33, no. 12 (2013): 387–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2013.09.003.
Full text
6
Costa, Leonardo Oliveira Pena, Anne M. Moseley, Catherine Sherrington, Christopher G. Maher, Robert D. Herbert, and Mark R. Elkins. "Core Journals That Publish Clinical Trials of Physical Therapy Interventions." Physical Therapy 90, no. 11 (2010): 1631–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20090419.
Full textAbstract:
Objective The objective of this study was to identify core journals in physical therapy by identifying those that publish the most randomized controlled trials of physical therapy interventions, provide the highest-quality reports of randomized controlled trials, and have the highest journal impact factors. Design This study was an audit of a bibliographic database. Methods All trials indexed in the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) were analyzed. Journals that had published at least 80 trials were selected. The journals were ranked in 4 ways: number of trials published; mean total PEDro score of the trials published in the journal, regardless of publication year; mean total PEDro score of the trials published in the journal from 2000 to 2009; and 2008 journal impact factor. Results The top 5 core journals in physical therapy, ranked by the total number of trials published, were Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Clinical Rehabilitation, Spine, British Medical Journal (BMJ), and Chest. When the mean total PEDro score was used as the ranking criterion, the top 5 journals were Journal of Physiotherapy, Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), Stroke, Spine, and Clinical Rehabilitation. When the mean total PEDro score of the trials published from 2000 to 2009 was used as the ranking criterion, the top 5 journals were Journal of Physiotherapy, JAMA, Lancet, BMJ, and Pain. The most highly ranked physical therapy–specific journals were Physical Therapy (ranked eighth on the basis of the number of trials published) and Journal of Physiotherapy (ranked first on the basis of the quality of trials). Finally, when the 2008 impact factor was used for ranking, the top 5 journals were JAMA, Lancet, BMJ, American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, and Thorax. There were no significant relationships among the rankings on the basis of trial quality, number of trials, or journal impact factor. Conclusions Physical therapists who are trying to keep up-to-date by reading the best available evidence on the effects of physical therapy interventions have to read more broadly than just physical therapy–specific journals. Readers of articles on physical therapy trials should be aware that high-quality trials are not necessarily published in journals with high impact factors.
7
Tsai, Chih-Fong, Ya-Han Hu, and Shih-Wen George Ke. "A Borda count approach to combine subjective and objective based MIS journal rankings." Online Information Review 38, no. 4 (2014): 469–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/oir-11-2013-0253.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose – Ranking relevant journals is very critical for researchers to choose their publication outlets, which can affect their research performance. In the management information systems (MIS) subject, many related studies conducted surveys as the subjective method for identifying MIS journal rankings. However, very few consider other objective methods, such as journals’ impact factors and h-indexes. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach – In this paper, top 50 ranked journals identified by researchers’ perceptions are examined in terms of the correlation to the rankings by their impact factors and h-indexes. Moreover, a hybrid method to combine these different rankings based on Borda count is used to produce new MIS journal rankings. Findings – The results show that there are low correlations between the subjective and objective based MIS journal rankings. In addition, the new MIS journal rankings by the Borda count approach can also be considered for future researches. Originality/value – The contribution of this paper is to apply the Borda count approach to combine different MIS journal rankings produced by subjective and objective methods. The new MIS journal rankings and previous studies can be complementary to allow researchers to determine the top-ranked journals for their publication outlets.
8
Parker, Gordon, and Kay Parker. "A Profile of Regional Psychiatry Publishing: Home and Away." Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 36, no. 5 (2002): 693–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1440-1614.2002.01075.x.
Full textAbstract:
Objective: Previous reports have profiled Australian psychiatry publishing in high-ranking international journals over the last two decades. An audit of selected high ranking and regional psychiatric journals was therefore undertaken to obtain a current profile of Australasian publishing. Methods: Journals were selected on the basis of impact factors for the year 2000, with the top five regional, generalist and specialist journals being selected, and with publication numbers over a two-year period (1999–2000) compared with numbers from other major geographical regions. Results: Of the 4573 papers identified in the 15 journals, Australasian authors contributed 269 to the regional journals (with two-thirds in the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry), 47 to the generalist journals (with two-thirds in Psychological Medicine) and very few (23) to the specialist journals. Representation in the so-called ‘dominant four’ international journals has increased since the 1986–1989 audit. When analysis was made of the ‘top nine’ international journals, the Australasian representation rate was a low 1.8% and lower than most regions examined. Conclusions: If Australasian psychiatry is to advance its international presence, a greater representation rate in top-ranking international journals should be set as an objective.
9
Aithal, P. S., and Aithal Shubhrajyotsna. "Scholarly Publishing : Why Smart Researcher Hesitate to Publish in/with Top Ranking Journals/Publishers." International Journal of Current Research and Modern Education (IJCRME) 1, no. 1 (2016): 829–45. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.62019.
Full textAbstract:
Scholarly publishing is the subfield of publishing in which research work is published in the form of an academic journal article, edited book or thesis form. Due to the monopoly of top ranking publishers, the researchers are struggling to publish their research articles quickly and at low publication cost. In order to reach the research findings to the entire world, every author prefers to publish in open access journal but, so called top ranking journals are charging a huge fee as article processing charges which are in general between $1,000 to $3,000 and some journals charges even $5,000 apart from article submission fee. Since such journals are not paying any remuneration for peer review process, the review process and final publication take a long time, generally eight to ten months. This constraint of a long time and huge cost involved in scholarly publishing made the smart publishers find an alternative strategy for publishing their research. In this paper, we have discussed why smart publishers hesitate to publish in top ranking journals and their alternative strategy based on their objectives. We have also discussed the black ocean strategy formulated by such publishers as a counter strategy to face such move.
10
Koseoglu, Mehmet Ali. "A new approach to journal ranking: social structure in hospitality and tourism journals." International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 32, no. 2 (2018): 389–424. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ijchm-10-2017-0622.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose This study introduces a new approach, called the social structure approach, for ranking academic journals by focusing on hospitality and tourism journals; and a hybrid metric, including the combination of the journal impact factor via citations and a social network metric, called the journal knowledge domain index (JKDI). Design/methodology/approach Twenty-five hospitality and tourism journals were selected to test this approach. Collaboration-based metrics, productivity-based metrics, and network-based metrics are considered components of the social structure approach. Additionally, a hybrid metric, including the combination of the journal impact factor via citations and a social network metric, JKDI, is developed. Findings The study’s findings show that top or leading journals have a weaker position in some social structure approach metrics compared to other (or follower) journals. However, according to the JKDI, leading journals have remained constant with the other ranking studies. Practical implications The ranking of academic journals is vital for the stakeholders of academia. Consequently, the findings of this study may help stakeholders to design an optimal ranking system and formulate and implement effective research strategies for knowledge creation and dissemination. Originality/value As one of the first in the journal-ranking literature, this study has significant implications, as it introduces a new ranking approach.
11
Chow, Chee W., Kamal Haddad, Gangaram Singh, and Anne Wu. "On Using Journal Rank to Proxy for an Article's Contribution or Value." Issues in Accounting Education 22, no. 3 (2007): 411–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.2308/iace.2007.22.3.411.
Full textAbstract:
This study explores the extent to which an article's value or contribution can be proxied by the ranking of the journal in which it is published. Following an approach commonly applied in prior journal ranking studies, we obtained eight-year citation counts for all articles published in 1992, 1994, 1996, and 1997 in nine accounting journals covered by the Social Science Citation Index®. For these four years combined as well as individually, we found that articles from the journals most often considered to be the top three (Journal of Accounting and Economics, Journal of Accounting Research, and The Accounting Review) do tend to be cited much more often than those from the other journals. However, across three different criteria for defining top articles, there were substantial classification errors from using publication in a topthree journal as a proxy for an article's contribution. The same patterns were obtained for major accounting sub-areas (e.g., financial accounting, auditing), and from a Google-based citation search covering 20 accounting journals. These findings strongly support the need to evaluate each article on its own merits, rather than abdicating this responsibility by using journal ranking as a proxy for an article's value or contribution.
12
Ginieis, Matías, and Xiaoni Li. "Ranking of Sustainability Journals Using the Author Affiliation Index and Comparison to Other Journal Metrics." Sustainability 12, no. 3 (2020): 1104. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su12031104.
Full textAbstract:
An important component in evaluating research productivity is the quality of the academic journal. For this reason, the objective of this paper is to analyze the Author Affiliation Index (AAI) in sustainability field journals as a preliminary study to offer some insights into quality rating of journals in this chosen discipline. The AAI of a journal is defined as the percentage of the journal’s articles published by authors affiliated with a base set of high-quality academic universities or institutions. We conducted an evaluation of the top 50 journals in environmental studies indexed in the category Social Science in the Web of Science (WOS) database in 2018 and the top-notch 50 universities worldwide with master or postgraduate programs in the disciplines of management and sustainability studies. The results obtained demonstrate that there is a low AAI score on average in the sustainability field compared with other disciplines and the potential reason for such low scoring is probably caused by the high number of co-authors collaborating in environmental studies related journals. Although there is no agreement reached in terms of journal ratings by AAIs and other citation and survey-based measures, we can confirm certain elite affiliations effect which leading sustainability journals have higher concentrations of authors who are affiliated with elite institutions, however, such elite affiliation effect is on average much lower compared with other disciplines as finance, accounting or transportation, etc.
13
Costa Vieira, Pedro Cosme. "Statistical variability of top ranking economics journals impact." Applied Economics Letters 11, no. 15 (2004): 945–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1350485042000282231.
Full text
14
Timmins, Fiona. "An overview of patterns and trends in nursing publications from the People's Republic of China." Frontiers of Nursing 7, no. 2 (2020): 111–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/fon-2020-0020.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractObjectiveTo explore patterns and trends in nursing publications from the People's Republic of China.MethodsUsing the Scopus online database, the author performed two searches in August 2019. The first search identified all items in the category of nursing affiliated to China, and the second search identified publications from China within one specific nursing journal. The author used a theoretical framework to provide a more in-depth understanding of patterns and trends within these items.ResultsThe number of articles categorized as nursing, with listed authorship in China, within the Scopus database was 17,506. The majority of published papers were categorized as research. Top-ranking Chinese universities, such as Peking University and Fudan University, scored high in terms of several publications listed within the database. Although categorized as nursing, the most common source titles that are mostly high-ranking journals did not feature the high-ranking nursing journals. Identified authors were generally not affiliated with nursing schools. Focused analysis of one of the top-ranking nursing journals, the Journal of Nursing Management, featured top Chinese universities and consistent nursing authorship. Nursing authors were found to have lower h-indices than international nursing professors.ConclusionsThere has been a steady increase year by year in publications categorized as nursing from China since 2009, with the majority of published papers categorized as research. There is clear evidence of scholarly activity in nursing in China, both in the published literature and anecdotally in practice. However, nursing scholars need to do more to increase dissemination and ensure that nursing professors are leading and driving nursing research, although in a multidisciplinary context. There is also a need for increased exposure of Chinese nursing scholarship in high-ranking nursing journals.
15
Powell, Deborah M., Jeffrey R. Spence, and David J. Stanley. "I-O psychology’s top journals at the bottom of the TOP ranking: Should we consider openness and transparency when ranking journals?" Industrial and Organizational Psychology 13, no. 3 (2020): 316–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/iop.2020.52.
Full text
16
West, Jevin D., Theodore C. Bergstrom, and Carl T. Bergstrom. "The Eigenfactor MetricsTM: A Network Approach to Assessing Scholarly Journals." College & Research Libraries 71, no. 3 (2010): 236–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.5860/0710236.
Full textAbstract:
Limited time and budgets have created a legitimate need for quantitative measures of scholarly work. The well-known journal impact factor is the leading measure of this sort; here we describe an alternative approach based on the full structure of the scholarly citation network. The Eigenfactor Metrics—Eigenfactor Score and Article Influence Score—use an iterative ranking scheme similar to Google’s PageRank algorithm. By this approach, citations from top journals are weighted more heavily than citations from lower-tier publications. Here we describe these metrics and the rankings that they provide.
17
MİXON, Franklin, and Kamal UPADHYAYA. "Scholarly Impact of Core Econometrics Journals: A Catalog and Citations-Based Ranking." International Econometric Review 13, no. 4 (2022): 118–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.33818/ier.984141.
Full textAbstract:
With 23 core econometrics journals now in operation, this study fills a gap in the literature by cataloguing the editorial specifications of each journal, and, more importantly, assessing their impact based on citations to research published in each over the 15-year period beginning in 2001 and ending in 2015. Our investigation reveals that about one-half of all core econometrics journals publish in an online format only, while the others publish both online and in-print. About one-fourth of all core econometrics journals are affiliated with an academic organization or society, while the same number are published by either Elsevier, Springer or Wiley. In terms of our assessment, Econometrica, Journal of Econometrics and Journal of Applied Econometrics sit atop our citations index ranking, while the relatively-new Journal of Financial Econometrics breaks into the top five, and other younger journals, such as the Journal of Econometric Methods and Econometrics, also make a strong showing in what is the first academic study assessing their productivity.
18
Haddad, Kamal, Gangaram Singh, Don Sciglimpaglia, and Hung Chan. "To what extent do articles published in other than “top journals” have impact on marketing?" European Journal of Marketing 48, no. 1/2 (2014): 271–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ejm-11-2010-0592.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose – The purpose of this study is to examine the relevance and limitations of using a top journal approach as a proxy for an article's value or contribution. Design/methodology/approach – The authors determined the citations for all articles published in 2001 and 2003 in 26 key marketing journals included in the Social Science Citation Index and 50 journals included in Google Scholar to rate the impact of a specific article. They also assessed these articles to examine the source of citations, as a way of measuring impact. Findings – This study indicates that articles published in the journals most often considered the top three or four in marketing are cited by others significantly more often than the ones published in the other journals. However, the authors found substantial misclassification errors from using publications in these “top” journals to infer a top article status across three different criteria for defining a top article. Originality/value – These findings strongly support the need to evaluate each article on its own merits, rather than abdicating this responsibility by using journal ranking as a proxy for an article's value or contribution.
19
Ortiz, Alberto, and Caroline Vinck. "Farewell from the CKJ Editor-in-Chief: key kidney topics from 2014 to 2021." Clinical Kidney Journal 15, no. 4 (2022): 593–602. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ckj/sfac023.
Full textAbstract:
ABSTRACT The year 2021 was the last full year of Alberto Ortiz’s editorship at Clinical Kidney Journal (CKJ). On May 2022, Maria José Soler will start her term as the Editor-in-Chief. Over these years, CKJ obtained its first journal impact factor and has consolidated its position among the top journals in the field, consistently ranking among the top 25% (first quartile) journals in Urology and Nephrology. The 2020 journal impact factor rose to 4.45, becoming the top open access journal in Nephrology and the ninth ranked Nephrology journal overall. We now review the recent history of the journal and the most highly cited topics which include the epidemiology of kidney disease, chronic kidney disease topics, such as the assessment and treatment of chronic kidney disease, onconephrology, cardionephrology, glomerular disease, transplantation and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).
20
Grandstaff, Jaime L., and Lori L. Solsma. "An Analysis of Information Systems Literature: Contributions to Fraud Research." Accounting and Finance Research 8, no. 4 (2019): 219. http://dx.doi.org/10.5430/afr.v8n4p219.
Full textAbstract:
This study analyzes the knowledge and methods used in information systems (IS) journals in the area of financial statement fraud. The purpose of this analysis is to provide tools and ideas to support interdisciplinary research in accounting and information systems for financial statement fraud topics. The study presents an analysis of five top ranking IS journals (MIS Quarterly, Information Systems Research, Communications of the ACM, Management Science, and Journal of MIS) and five top ranking IS conferences [International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS), Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), International Federation for Information Processing (IFIP), International Conference on Decision Support Systems (DSS), and Decision Sciences Institute National Conference (DSI)]. The literature found from these sources are categorized and presented by year, journal, contribution, type of study, methodology, data set usage, and research design. Although the literature varies, a common thread in many studies is the use of data mining and/or machine learning models to detect fraud.
21
Cahn, E. Susanna. "Journal Rankings." International Journal of Information Systems in the Service Sector 6, no. 4 (2014): 92–103. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/ijisss.2014100106.
Full textAbstract:
Research productivity is important in school reputation as well as individual faculty evaluation. In order to evaluate research productivity, the quality of research is often measured by proxy through the number of journal articles and ratings of the journals in which they appear. Because of this there is significant pressure on faculty to publish in the “top journals”. There are several metrics for evaluating and ranking journals, each of them with its own merits and limitations. Some commonly used quantitative measures of research quality are citation analyses, acceptance rates, and whether or not a journal is peer reviewed. Alternatively, journals can be ranked qualitatively into stratified groups based on reputation. Reputation, in turn, may be correlated with perceived values of quantitative measures, and thus is more subjective. The purpose of this research is to examine the extent of correlation between various measures of journal quality, in particular between quantitative and qualitative measures. The various measures are compared to examine the extent to which they are similar. Comparisons were also made among business departments. For this sample, overall journal rank was correlated with citation rate but not with acceptance rate. However, quantitative measures were not consistent among academic departments, indicating that journal rank can not be reliably used to make interdepartmental comparisons.
22
K, Rajesh Kumar, and P. Padma. "Growth of Science Research and Its Reflections on Academic Performance at the University of Kerala." DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology 44, no. 6 (2024): 384–93. https://doi.org/10.14429/djlit.44.6.20049.
Full textAbstract:
This study explores the science research output of the University of Kerala based on data derived from the web of science. By limiting the number of articles published in journals under the science citation index- expanded from 2013 to 2022, the study brings insights into the various patterns of academic publishing in an Indian university. The study also identifies the impact of the university’s academic publishing on its performance in different academic rankings and accreditation processes in India- a total of 1877 journal articles published during this period. The analysis highlights the contributions of the top ten authors, with Anirudhan T.S. leading in citations with 3217 and H-index with 34. The productivity metrics show a fluctuating citation impact over the years, reaching a peak in publications in 2021 with 327 articles. The top 20 journals by research output reveal diverse fields of publication, with significant contributions to journals like the Journal of Molecular Structure and the Journal of Alloys and Compounds. Geoscience Frontiers has the highest average citations per article, at 77.82. Despite the modest number of publications, these articles have significantly enhanced the university’s academic reputation and ranking. The findings suggest the need for strategic measures to boost research output, particularly in the social sciences and humanities departments.
23
Madhugiri, Venkatesh S., Sudheer Ambekar, Shane F. Strom, and Anil Nanda. "A technique to identify core journals for neurosurgery using citation scatter analysis and the Bradford distribution across neurosurgery journals." Journal of Neurosurgery 119, no. 5 (2013): 1274–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.3171/2013.8.jns122379.
Full textAbstract:
Object The volume of scientific literature doubles approximately every 7 years. The coverage of this literature provided by online compendia is variable and incomplete. It would hence be useful to identify “core” journals in any field and validate whether the h index and impact factor truly identify the core journals in every subject. The core journals in every medical specialty would be those that provide a current and comprehensive coverage of the science in that specialty. Identifying these journals would make it possible for individual physicians to keep abreast of research and clinical progress. Methods The top 10 neurosurgical journals (on the basis of impact factor and h index) were selected. A database of all articles cited in the reference lists of papers published in issues of these journals published in the first quarter of 2012 was generated. The journals were ranked based on the number of papers cited from each. This citation rank list was compared with the h index and impact factor rank lists. The rank list was also examined to see if the concept of core journals could be validated for neurosurgical literature using Bradford's law. Results A total of 22,850 papers spread across 2522 journals were cited in neurosurgical literature over 3 months. Although the top 10 journals were the same, irrespective of ranking criterion (h index, impact factor, citation ranking), the 3 rank lists were not congruent. The top 25% of cited articles obeyed the Bradford distribution; beyond this, there was a zone of increased scatter. Six core journals were identified for neurosurgery. Conclusions The core journals for neurosurgery were identified to be Journal of Neurosurgery, Neurosurgery, Spine, Acta Neurochirurgica, Stroke, and Journal of Neurotrauma. A list of core journals could similarly be generated for every subject. This would facilitate a focused reading to keep abreast of current knowledge. Collated across specialties, these journals could depict the current status of medical science.
24
Card, David, and Stefano DellaVigna. "Nine Facts about Top Journals in Economics." Journal of Economic Literature 51, no. 1 (2013): 144–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/jel.51.1.144.
Full textAbstract:
How has publishing in top economics journals changed since 1970? Using a data set that combines information on all articles published in the top-five journals from 1970 to 2012 with their Google Scholar citations, we identify nine key trends. First, annual submissions to the top-five journals nearly doubled from 1990 to 2012. Second, the total number of articles published in these journals actually declined from 400 per year in the late 1970s to 300 per year most recently. As a result, the acceptance rate has fallen from 15 percent to 6 percent, with potential implications for the career progression of young scholars. Third, one journal, the American Economic Review, now accounts for 40 percent of top-five publications, up from 25 percent in the 1970s. Fourth, recently published papers are on average three times longer than they were in the 1970s, contributing to the relative shortage of journal space. Fifth, the number of authors per paper has increased from 1.3 in 1970 to 2.3 in 2012, partly offsetting the fall in the number of articles per year. Sixth, citations for top-five publications are high: among papers published in the late 1990s, the median number of Google Scholar citations is 200. Seventh, the ranking of journals by citations has remained relatively stable, with the notable exception of the Quarterly Journal of Economics, which climbed from fourth place to first place over the past three decades. Eighth, citation counts are significantly higher for longer papers and those written by more coauthors. Ninth, although the fraction of articles from different fields published in the top five has remained relatively stable, there are important cohort trends in the citations received by papers from different fields, with rising citations to more recent papers in Development and International, and declining citations to recent papers in Econometrics and Theory. (JEL A14)
25
Valenzuela-Fernández, Leslier M., José M. Merigó, Carolina Nicolas, and Michael Kleinaltenkamp. "Leaders in industrial marketing research: 25 years of analysis." Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 35, no. 3 (2019): 586–601. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jbim-12-2018-0367.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose This paper aims to present a bibliometric overview of the leading trends of the journals in industrial marketing during for 25 years. Thus, the purpose is to carry out an analysis about contributions that industrial marketing or business to business (B2B) marketing discipline has done for scientific investigation, presenting a ranking of the 30 most influential journals and their global evolution by five-year periods from 1992 to 2016. Moreover, this study presents the amount of citations, who quotes who from the top 15 ranking and self-citations. Design/methodology/approach This study analyzes 3,587 documents classified as articles, letters, notes and reviews from Clarivate Analytics’ Web of Science for the period 1992- 2016, by bibliometric indicators such as H-index, total citations (TC), total papers (TP), TC/TP. Furthermore, this paper develops a graphical visualization of the bibliographic material by using the visualization of similarities viewer software for constructing and visualizing bibliometric networks in leading journals, publications and keywords with bibliographic coupling and co-citation analysis. Findings Industrial Marketing Management is the leader of the ranking, representing 34 per cent of the total manuscripts considered in this study. The most influential journals were classified by periods of five years and the top five for the period 2012-2016 were in ascending order: Industrial Marketing Management, Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, Journal of Business-to-Business Marketing, Journal of Business Research and Journal of Marketing. Therefore, in this last period, the considered specialized journals of industrial marketing have increased the quantity (TP) and quality (better H-index) of marketing contributions. The main node on the keywords was of “business-to-business marketing.” The most frequent keywords were “industrial marketing,” “trust,” “business-to-business,” “B2B,” “relationship marketing” and finally “electronic commerce”. Practical implications The information presented in this paper is useful to academics, publishers, academic institutions and other interested groups in industrial marketing because it makes available a global and current picture of this discipline that could be used to make decisions about publishing strategies and journal position. Originality/value This study aims to analyze the progress of industrial marketing discipline, reviewing the contribution of several scientific journals for 25 years. In fact, to the authors’ knowledge, this is the first quantitative study focused on the only purpose of ranking the most influential journals and keywords analysis using bibliometric techniques and networks theories.
26
Basavarajaiah Doddagangavadi Mariyappa, Gangabyrappana palya Hanumanthrayappa Hemantha Kumar, and Bhamidipathi Narasimhamurthy. "An author level metrics of scholarly impact journals; cited through Google Scholar Source." World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews 15, no. 3 (2022): 331–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.30574/wjarr.2022.15.3.0952.
Full textAbstract:
As academic journals have become more digital, scientific writers now have more chances to increase the visibility of their research and its citations globally. The metrics is the gold standard. It is used to decide the ranking and benchmark of the journals which will be determined using bibliometrics and different algorithms. Numerous predatory journals are lack of international standards and low quality. Authors will be unable to submit their research papers or reports to the journals for publication with a high impact factor in this circumstance. The main objective of this study is to focus on identifying the global citations by investigating the author level metrics of the top hundred scholarly publications. Data were gathered from Google Scholar source between January 2021 and September 2022 for the study, which was quantitative in nature. Hypothesis was tested by simulation growth model and statistically approximates the h5 citation and Journal impact factor. Asper the results, top hundred first ranking was seen in Nature Reviews and Molecular Cell Biology (h5 155, IF 113.90 h5 median 340) followed by nature reviews immunology (h5 152, IF 108.60 h5 median 292), The highest ranking discipline that was substantially correlated with citation was health and medical sciences (r = 0.91, R2 % = 0.97) followed by physics and mathematics (r = 0.89, R2 % = 0.94).Finally, this study implies that open access journals should have display metrics information for the researchers which can be act as formidable tool for the publishers, scientists and researchers enabling them to make informed decisions at the appropriate moment and disseminate scientific knowledge globally.
27
CHANG, CHIA-LIN, and MICHAEL MCALEER. "JUST HOW GOOD ARE THE TOP THREE JOURNALS IN FINANCE? AN ASSESSMENT BASED ON QUANTITY AND QUALITY CITATIONS." Annals of Financial Economics 09, no. 01 (2014): 1450005. http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/s2010495214500055.
Full textAbstract:
The paper is concerned with ranking academic journal quality and research impact in Finance, based on the widely-used Thomson Reuters ISI (2013) Web of Science citations database (hereafter ISI). The paper analyses the 89 leading international journals in the ISI category of "Business–Finance" using quantifiable Research Assessment Measures (RAMs). The analysis highlights the similarities and differences in various RAMs, all of which are based on alternative transformations of journal citations and impact. Alternative RAMs may be calculated annually or updated daily to determine the citations frequency of published papers that are cited in journals listed in ISI. The RAMs include the classic 2-year impact factor including journal self citations (2YIF), 2-year impact factor excluding journal self citations (2YIF*), 5-year impact factor including journal self citations (5YIF), Immediacy including journal self citations, Eigenfactor (or Journal Influence), Article Influence (AI), h-index, Papers Ignored-By Even The Authors (PI-BETA), Self-citation Threshold Approval Rating (STAR), 5YD2 (namely, 5YIF divided by 2YIF), Escalating Self Citations (ESC) and Index of Citation Quality (ICQ). The paper calculates the harmonic mean (HM) of the ranks of up to 16 RAMs. It is shown that emphasizing 2YIF to the exclusion of other informative RAMs can lead to a misleading evaluation of journal quality and impact relative to the HM of the ranks. The analysis of the 89 ISI journals in Finance makes it clear that there are three leading journals in Finance, namely Journal of Finance, Journal of Financial Economics and Review of Financial Studies, which form an exclusive club in terms of the RAMs that measure journal quality and impact based on alternative measures of journal citations. The next two journals in Finance in terms of overall quality and impact are Journal of Accounting and Economics and Journal of Monetary Economics. As Accounting does not have a separate classification in ISI, the tables of rankings given in the paper are also used to rank the top 3 journals in the sub-category of Accounting in the ISI category of "Business – Finance", namely Journal of Accounting and Economics, Accounting Review, and Journal of Accounting Research.
28
El, Khoury Joseph, Riwa Kanj, Lynn Adam, et al. "The contribution of authors from low- and middle-income countries to top-tier mental health journals." European Science Editing 47 (October 21, 2021): e72187. https://doi.org/10.3897/ese.2021.e72187.
Full textAbstract:
Background: Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) have been consistently under-represented in the pool of contributors to academic journals on health. For the past two decades, prominent voices within the psychiatric profession have called for better representation of LMICs in the interest of advancing the understanding of mental health globally and benefiting health systems in these countries.Objective: To investigate the absolute and relative representation of authors affiliated to institutes from LMICs in the most influential journals on mental health in 2019.Method: Thirty top-ranking journals on mental health based on Scimago Journal Rank were selected, and all papers other than correspondence and letters to the editor published in those journals in 2019 were examined to extract the country of affiliation of each of their authors and their position (corresponding author, first author, second author).Results: Of the 4022 articles examined, 3720 articles (92.5%) were written exclusively by authors from high-income countries (HICs); 302 (7.5%) featured one or more authors from a LMIC along with those from HICs; 91 (2.2%) featured authors only from one LMIC; and only 3 (0.07%) featured authors from more than one LMICs but without any co-author from a HIC. The ratio of articles by contributors from LMICs to all the articles published in 2019 in a given journal ranged from 0% to 19%. Of 1855 individual contributors from 45 LMICs, 1050 (56%) were from China.Conclusion: Despite the growth of the global health movement and frequent calls for academic inclusivity, LMICs were significantly under-represented among the authors of papers published in top-ranking journals on mental health in 2019.
29
Cribari-Neto, Francisco, Mark J. Jensen, and Álvaro A. Novo. "RESEARCH IN ECONOMETRIC THEORY: QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE PRODUCTIVITY RANKINGS." Econometric Theory 15, no. 5 (1999): 719–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0266466699155051.
Full textAbstract:
We rank institutions and researchers based on a standardized page count of their econometric theory publications over the last 11 years (1986–1996) in 11 economics and statistics journals. Our ranking criteria differ from those employed by Hall (1987, Econometric Theory 3, 171–194; 1990, Econometric Theory 6, 1–16) and Baltagi (1998, Econometric Theory 14, 1–43). We weight the standardized page count of a publication by the publishing journal's “impact factor,” which measures a journal's impact on the profession. We also depart from the previous rankings by focusing only on publications in theoretical econometrics. Our rankings reveal Yale University to be the leading academic institution, enjoying a large lead over the other top institutions: University of Chicago, M.I.T., and London School of Economics. Our rankings also reveal that Peter Phillips and Donald Andrews (both affiliated with Yale University) are the leading researchers in theoretical econometrics. We also provide rankings of countries and Ph.D. programs.
30
Simon, Hermann. "The Internationalization of German Marketing Science." Marketing ZFP 43, no. 1-2 (2021): 5–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.15358/0344-1369-2021-1-2-5.
Full textAbstract:
In the 1970s, marketing science in Germany was limited to the German-speaking world. My early appeal to publish in English and to change the language of German journals to English met with strong opposition from established professors. Today, 40 years later, a considerable number of German-speaking marketing scientists belong to the international top group in the Hirsch-index ranking. German journals are now publishing in English, but the transition came late, and it will be difficult to acquire A-journal status. In terms of inbound internationalization a lot remains to be done.
31
Ruamviboonsuk, Varis, Bandit Thinkhamrop, Kittisak Kulvichit, and Wasee Tulvatana. "Data sharing implementation in top 10 ophthalmology journals in 2021." BMJ Open Ophthalmology 8, no. 1 (2023): e001276. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjophth-2023-001276.
Full textAbstract:
Background/AimsDeidentified individual participant data (IPD) sharing has been implemented in the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors journals since 2017. However, there were some published clinical trials that did not follow the new implemented policy. This study examines the number of clinical trials that endorsed IPD sharing policy among top ophthalmology journals.MethodAll published original articles in 2021 in 10 highest-ranking ophthalmology journals according to the 2020 journal impact factor were included. Clinical trials were determined by the WHO definition of clinical trials. Each article was then thoroughly searched for the IPD sharing statement either in the manuscript or in the clinical trial registry. We collected the number of published clinical trials that implemented IPD sharing policy as our primary outcome.Results1852 published articles in top 10 ophthalmology journals were identified, and 9.45% were clinical trials. Of these clinical trials, 44% had clinical trial registrations and 49.14% declared IPD sharing statements. Only 42 (48.83%) clinical trials were willing to share IPD, and 5 (10.21%) of these share IPD via an online repository platform. In terms of sharing period, 37 clinical trials were willing to share right after the publication and only 2 showed the ending of sharing period.ConclusionThis report shows that the number of clinical trials in top ophthalmology journals that endorsed the IPD sharing policy and the number of registrations is lower than half even though the policy has been implemented for several years. Future updates are necessary as policy evolves.
32
Basavarajaiah, Doddagangavadi Mariyappa, palya Hanumanthrayappa Hemantha Kumar Gangabyrappana, and Narasimhamurthy Bhamidipathi. "An author level metrics of scholarly impact journals; cited through Google Scholar Source." World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews 15, no. 3 (2022): 331–39. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7766409.
Full textAbstract:
As academic journals have become more digital, scientific writers now have more chances to increase the visibility of their research and its citations globally. The metrics is the gold standard. It is used to decide the ranking and benchmark of the journals which will be determined using bibliometrics and different algorithms. Numerous predatory journals are lack of international standards and low quality. Authors will be unable to submit their research papers or reports to the journals for publication with a high impact factor in this circumstance. The main objective of this study is to focus on identifying the global citations by investigating the author level metrics of the top hundred scholarly publications. Data were gathered from Google Scholar source between January 2021 and September 2022 for the study, which was quantitative in nature. Hypothesis was tested by simulation growth model and statistically approximates the h<sub>5</sub> citation and Journal impact factor. Asper the results, top hundred first ranking was seen in Nature Reviews and Molecular Cell Biology (h<sub>5</sub> 155, IF 113.90 h5 median 340) followed by nature reviews immunology (h<sub>5</sub> 152, IF 108.60 h5 median 292), The highest ranking discipline that was substantially correlated with citation was health and medical sciences (r = 0.91, R<sup>2</sup> % = 0.97) followed by physics and mathematics (r = 0.89, R<sup>2 </sup>% = 0.94).Finally, this study implies that open access journals should have display metrics information for the researchers which can be act as formidable tool for the publishers, scientists and researchers enabling them to make informed decisions at the appropriate moment and disseminate scientific knowledge globally.
33
Nelson, Karen, and Tracy Creagh. "Editorial Volume 15 Issue 1 2024." Student Success 15, no. 1 (2024): i—iii. http://dx.doi.org/10.5204/ssj.3378.
Full textAbstract:
In 2024 the Journal publishes its 15th volume, a significant achievement for a non-commercial open access publication.
 The Journal has evolved significantly in recent years and submissions continue to increase in number and quality. The Journal is now indexed broadly and included in Scopus, Web of Science and DOAJ. Student Success is one of only nine journals published in Australasia with the DOAJ Seal for Best Practice in Open Access publishing. We are very pleased that in 2023 Student Success was ranked as a Q1 journal in the Scimago (Scopus) ranking in the category of ‘Education’ and is ranked 4th in Australia in this category – internationally it is in the top 50 open access education journals. This ranking isn’t taken for granted and didn’t happen through good luck. It is the combined result of a dedicated editorial team, our constructive reviewers and wise Advisory Board, and importantly the quality of the research articles being submitted for consideration in this important domain. We’ve been building to this new position since the Journal started, with the first steps being having the Journal indexed in abstract and citation databases (like Scopus) and then allowing several more years to achieve any type of ranking at all. We are very pleased to have reached this important benchmark within 15 years. The challenge for all of us now is to ensure that we retain that ranking, through our rigorous review processes and attention to the quality of research we publish.
34
Opthof, Tobias. "Comparison of the Impact Factors of the Most-Cited Cardiovascular Journals." Circulation Research 124, no. 12 (2019): 1718–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/circresaha.119.315249.
Full textAbstract:
In this article, I show that the distribution of citations to papers published by the top 30 journals in the category Cardiac & Cardiovascular Systems of the Web of Science is extremely skewed. This skewness is to the right, which means that there is a long tail of papers that are cited much more frequently than the other papers of the same journal. The consequence is that there is a large difference between the mean and the median of the citation of the papers published by the journals. I further found that there are no differences between the citation distributions of the top 4 journals European Heart Journal , Circulation , Journal of the American College of Cardiology , and Circulation Research . Despite the fact that the journal impact factor (IF) varied between 23.425 for Eur Heart J and 15.211 for Circ Res with the other 2 journals in between, the median citation of their articles plus reviews (IF Median) was 10 for all 4 journals. Given the fact that their citation distributions were similar, it is obvious that an indicator (IF Median) that reflects this similarity must be superior to the classical journal impact factor, which may indicate a nonexisting difference. It is underscored that the IF Median is substantially lower than the journal impact factor for all 30 journals under consideration in this article. Finally, the IF Median has the additional advantage that there is no artificial ranking of 128 journals in the category but rather an attribution of journals to a limited number of classes with comparable impact.
35
Bernardi, Richard A., and Kimberly Z. Collins. "Ranking Accounting Scholars Publishing AIS and Technology Research in Accounting Education." AIS Educator Journal 13, no. 1 (2018): 1–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.3194/1935-8156-13.1.1.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract This research provides rankings of AIS/Technology authors in accounting-education research. The sample includes the publications in 14 accounting-education journals and two American Accounting Association AIS/Technology section journals that have a separate ‘Education’ area. We provide a breakdown of the outlets used by AIS/Technology authors and rank the top authors in AIS/Technology research by PhD/DBA-year group. Finally, data are provided that allow authors not listed in the rankings regardless of their degree to benchmark their research productivity and a list of the top-25 institutions whose faculty have published the most AIS/Technology research in accounting education. Colleagues can use the data as a benchmark in the merit, promotion and/or tenure processes.
36
Laband, David N., and Daowei Zhang. "Citations, Publications, and Perceptions-Based Rankings of the Research Impact of North American Forestry Programs." Journal of Forestry 104, no. 5 (2006): 254–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jof/104.5.254.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Using the online citation service available through the Institute for Scientific Information and publication records, we constructed rankings of 53 North American forestry programs based on (1) total citations to the scholarly contributions of current faculty, (2) citations per research faculty member, (3) total number of publications in five top forestry journals, (4) total number of pages, (5) total number of publications per research faculty member, and (6) total number of page per research faculty member, from January 1997 to December 2001. We then compared these results against a ranking of the top forestry schools, based on perceived research profile, as indicated by survey responses from deans and department heads.
37
Bornmann, Lutz, Alexander Butz, and Klaus Wohlrabe. "What are the top five journals in economics? A new meta-ranking." Applied Economics 50, no. 6 (2017): 659–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2017.1332753.
Full text
38
Molero, Juan Carlos, and Francesc Pujol. "Ranking Italian Universities and Other Research Institutions Taking into Account Public Economics Publications." Journal of Public Finance and Public Choice 22, no. 1 (2004): 15–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1332/251569204x15668904587098.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract The different ways to rank universities regarding their research production include a great number of factors. The quality of journals where faculty members are publishing is one of the most relevant aspects in order to determine the quality of the affiliation institution. Among other more traditional ways determining the quality of journals, this paper takes into account a new one based on the publishing behavior of top ranked authors, supposing a matching model approach among journals and authors. Using this methodology, the article establishes a ranking of the Italian universities and other research institutions regarding public economics journals.
39
Jones, Teresa, Stephen Hanney, Martin Buxton, and Tom Burns. "What British psychiatrists read." British Journal of Psychiatry 185, no. 3 (2004): 251–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1192/bjp.185.3.251.
Full textAbstract:
BackgroundThe role of journals in disseminating research to clinicians is increasingly debated. Current measures of esteem for journals (e.g. impact factors) may not indicate clinical penetration.AimsTo assess the perceived importance of different mental health journals to psychiatrists' clinical practice and compare this with impact factors.MethodRandom samples of psychiatrists providing child and adolescent, adults of working age and old age services chose up to ten journals read or consulted with regard to their clinical work, ranking the top three. For these journals, comparisons were made with impact factors and importance as outlets for UK psychiatry research.ResultsA total of 560 questionnaires were completed (47%). Two membership journals (the British Journal of Psychiatry and the BMJ) were most read and highest ranked. Associations between impact factors, clinicians' ratings and importance as outlets for psychiatry papers varied.ConclusionsThe results could lead to reconsideration of the importance of some journals. Academic assessments of the status of journals should not be assumed to reflect their influence on clinicians.
40
Park, Bong Soo, Il Hwan Kim, and Kang Min Park. "Top 100 Cited Articles on Sleep Medicine: A Bibliometric Analysis." European Neurology 83, no. 1 (2020): 111–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000507393.
Full textAbstract:
Background: The purpose of this study was to identify the top 100 cited articles dedicated to sleep medicine published in journals that have made key contributions to the field. Methods: We performed a search of journals and selected 100 top-cited articles by utilizing the Institute for Scientific Information database available under the banner of the Web of Science. Next, we manually reviewed the contents of the top 100 cited articles. We examined the characteristics of the articles, such as the number of citations, ranking, authorship, article title, year of publication, publishing journal, publication type, and topic categories. Results: The top-cited articles were published in 49 journals, and the most frequently cited journal was Sleep (23 articles). The top 100 cited articles originated from institutions in 9 countries, with the USA contributing 67 articles. The institution associated with the largest numbers of sleep medicine citation classics was Stanford University (11 articles). Morin CM, who was the first author for 6 articles, was listed most frequently in the sleep medicine citation classics. The publication years were concentrated in the 2000s, when 42 articles were published. The topics included 35 insomnia studies, 25 sleep physiology studies, 22 obstructive sleep apnea studies, and 19 other studies. Conclusions: The present study provides a detailed list of the most-cited articles on sleep medicine. This currently relevant approach provides an opportunity to recognize the classic articles on sleep, to provide useful insights into international leaders, and to describe research trends in the field of sleep medicine.
41
Spiroski, Mirko. "Current Biomedical Scientific Impact (2013) of Institutions, Academic Journals and Researchers in the Republic of Macedonia." PRILOZI 35, no. 3 (2014): 67–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/prilozi-2015-0010.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractAim: To analyse current ranking (2013) of institutions, journals and researchers in the Republic of Macedonia.Material and Methods: the country rankings of R. Macedonia were analyzed with SCImago Country & Journal Rank (SJR) for subject area Medicine in the years 1996-2013, and ordered by H-index. SCImago Institutions Rankings for 2013 was used for the scientific impact of biomedical institutions in the Republic of Macedonia. Journal metrics from Elsevier for the Macedonian scholarly journals for the period 2009-2013 were performed. Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP), the Impact per Publication (IPP), and SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) were analysed. Macedonian scholarly biomedical journals included in Google Scholar metrics (2013, 2012) were analysed with h5-index and h5-median (June 2014). A semantic analysis of the PubMed database was performed with GoPubMed on November 2, 2014 in order to identify published papers from the field of biomedical sciences affiliated with the country of Macedonia. Harzing's Publish or Perish software was used for author impact analysis and the calculation of the Hirsh-index based on Google Scholar query.Results: The rank of subject area Medicine of R. Macedonia according to the SCImago Journal & Country Rank (SJR) is 110th in the world and 17th in Eastern Europe. Of 20 universities in Macedonia, only Ss Cyril and Methodius University, Skopje, and the University St Clement of Ohrid, Bitola, are listed in the SCImago Institutions Rankings (SIR) for 2013. A very small number of Macedonian scholarly journals is included in Web of Sciences (2), PubMed (1), PubMed Central (1), SCOPUS (6), SCImago (6), and Google Scholar metrics (6). The rank of Hirsh index (h-index) was different from the rank of number of abstracts indexed in PubMed for the top 20 authors from R. Macedonia.Conclusion: The current biomedical scientific impact (2013) of institutions, academic journals and researchers in R. Macedonia is very low. There is an urgent need for organized measures to improve the quality and output of institutions, scholarly journals, and researchers in R. Macedonia in order to achieve higher international standards.
42
Nixon, Judith M. "Core Journals in Library and Information Science: Developing a Methodology for Ranking LIS Journals." College & Research Libraries 75, no. 1 (2014): 66–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.5860/crl12-387.
Full textAbstract:
In the library science field, there is no professionally accepted tiered list of journals in the United States to guide librarians, as there is in other academic disciplines. This situation creates a challenge for both new and experienced librarians who wish to make a serious contribution to librarianship by publishing articles. This article outlines a methodology used at the Libraries of Purdue University, which could be adapted by other university libraries, to create a tiered list of journals tailored to the institution. The article begins with a literature review that identifies a short list of top-level journals. This is followed by the methodology that uses expert opinion surveys, acceptance and circulation rates, impact factors, h-indexes, and journals with local faculty articles. Tables with the journals ranked into three tiers are included.
43
Chang, Young-Tae, Ahhyun Jo, and Kyoung-Suk Choi. "Dynamic Changes in Maritime Research Capability in Chinese Universities." Journal of Advanced Transportation 2019 (August 25, 2019): 1–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2019/4183065.
Full textAbstract:
This study determines the top fifty authors in China and their university affiliations in the maritime transportation field, compared to their world ranking. We refer to China in the broad sense of the Chinese economies, including not only mainland China and Hong Kong, but also Chinese Taipei (Taiwan) and Singapore. This study analyzes sixty-five SSCI and SCI journals in the field of maritime and transportation between the years 2000 and 2015. In terms of ranking, three indicators are employed: total number of articles, weighted score (indication of author contribution), and the impact score. With the exception of Shanghai Jiao Tong University, no other universities selected in the first phase of Project 985, which received billions of dollars in government support/aid, were listed in the world ranking. Star authors are deemed to have contributed greatly to the rankings of their affiliated universities. The future of China’s rankings is bright in view of the increasing number of papers being published by Chinese authors and universities and their strong grounding in quantitative methodologies.
44
Albers, Sönke. "Misleading Rankings of Research in Business." German Economic Review 10, no. 3 (2009): 352–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0475.2009.00483.x.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract The attempts by Schulze and colleagues and Ritzberger to develop a joint ranking of journals for economics and business research are critically evaluated. Their lists suggest that the quality of top business journals is substantially lower than that of many economics journals. If, however, the authors of these lists do not want to claim a general superiority of one discipline (economics) over another one (business), they should give a clear indication that these lists are only applicable for economists. This warning appears to be necessary because Fabel and colleagues derive a ranking of universities and departments with respect to research productivity in business from the business research discriminating list RbR_IMP by Schulze and colleagues. While Diamantopoulos and Wagner already show a lack of face validity of these results, this article explains that the reason for this lies not only in the downgrading and also biased weighting of the business journals across subfields, but even more importantly, in a remarkable incompleteness of the database.
45
Sreeramana, Aithal. "Study of Research Productivity in World Top Business Schools." International Journal of Engineering Research and Modern Education (IJERME) ISSN (Online): 2455 - 4200 1, no. 1 (2016): 629–44. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.160969.
Full textAbstract:
Institutional Ranking in higher educational institutions became common practice and business schools are highly benefitted by the announced worldwide ranks based on various ranking criterions. The ranking is usually announced based on pedagogy, placement, research output, faculty-student ratio, international linkage, management of technology etc. We have developed a model of calculating research productivity of higher educational institution based on calculating institutional research index and weighted research index. The institutional research productivity is calculated using a metric which consists of three institutional variables and one parameter. The three variables identified as the number of Articles published in peer reviewed journals (A), the number of Books published (B), and number of Case studies and/or Book Chapters (C) published during a given time of observation. The parameter used is the number of full-time Faculty members (F) in that higher education institution which remains constant during a given period of observation. In this paper, we have used ABC model of institutional research productivity to calculate annual research productivity of some of the world top business schools. The annual publication data for the year 2015 is collected from the respective institutional websites. The research productivity of these institutions are determined and compared. Based on research productivity index, and corrected research productivity index, the Business Schools are re-ranked. The parameters used in Financial Times (FT) Ranking system is compared with the features of ABC research productivity ranking model.
46
Fesenko, Ievgen. "Scilit Database and the Journal of Endodontic Microsurgery." Journal of Endodontic Microsurgery 2 (January 1, 2023): 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.23999/jem.2023.2.1.
Full textAbstract:
Visibility of articles is a key task for any peer-reviewed journal. It makes articles to be cited more likely thus helping journals to grow and to hold higher positions in international ranking systems. Like Elsevier company running the Scopus database, the Scilit database has been launched and is managing by another academic publishing company—MDPI (Basel, Switzerland). A Scilit name is a contraction of two words—scientific and literature. As a publishing house team, we are proud to receive inclusion of the Journal of Endodontic Microsurgery to its first database. Like other respected international open access English-language journals, among top priors of our Journal are listing in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. For that purposes we will assist the editorial board of the Journal, helping to publish high quality articles in the field of endodontic microsurgery.
47
Brendel, Jan, and Sascha Schweitzer. "The Burden of Knowledge in Mathematics." Open Economics 2, no. 1 (2019): 139–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/openec-2019-0012.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractWe investigate how the potential burden of processing ever more knowledge has affected the careers and research output of researchers in mathematics over the past 64 years. We construct a panel dataset of 48.851 researchers who published in ten top-ranking journals in mathematics. For this population of researchers, we supplement the dataset with years of birth from public sources. Our results show a significant increase of the average age of researchers at their first publication in one of our top-ranking journals, of the number of references of single-author articles, and of the number of coauthors that contribute to an article. Our findings extend earlier empirical findings on patents, as well as on researchers in economics, and hint at a burden of knowledge pervading different areas of human development. Moreover, our results indicate that researchers develop strategies like the division of labor to deal with this burden.
48
Sreeramana, Aithal. "Study of Annual Research Productivity in Indian Top Business Schools." International Journal of Scientific Research and Modern Education (IJSRME) ISSN (Online): 2455 – 5630 1, no. 1 (2016): 402–14. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.161041.
Full textAbstract:
Institutional Ranking in higher educational institutions became common practice and business schools are highly benefitted by announced ranks based on various ranking criterions. Ranking is usually announced based on the criterions like pedagogy, placement salary, research output, faculty-student ratio, international linkage, management of technology, infrastructural facilities etc. Recently, we have developed a model of calculating research productivity of higher educational institution based on calculating institutional research index and weighted research index. The institutional research productivity is calculated using a metric model called ABC model which consists of four institutional parameters identified as number of Articles published in peer reviewed journals (A), number of Books published (B), number of Case studies and/or Book Chapters (C) published, and the number of full-time Faculty members (F) in that higher education institution during a given time of observation. In this paper, we have used ABC model of institutional research productivity to calculate research productivity of some of the Indian top business schools. The publication data is collected from institutional website for the year 2015. The research productivity of these institutions are determined and compared. Based on research productivity index, the Business Schools are re-ranked.
49
Kumar Satpathy, Sunil, Rabindra K. Maharana, and Ashok Kumar Das. "Open source journals of library and information science: a bibliometric study." Collection Building 33, no. 1 (2013): 15–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/cb-09-2013-0031.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose – The aim of this paper is to investigate the scholarly communications in open access journals of library & information science and to study the key dimensions of these publications. Design/methodology/approach – For the analysis of the study, top ten open access journals of 2011, which were indexed in SCOPUS, have been selected. The authors employed necessary bibliometric measures to analyze different publication parameters. Findings – It is found that the contribution of articles in these top ten open access journals in 2011 is good, i.e. 37.3 percent. Single authored papers are found to be the highest (40.48 percent), followed by two-authored and then three-authored papers. The degree of collaboration is found to be between 0.33 and 0.8. The numbers of citations used in the paper are also good (average 21.48 percent paper). In regards to ranking of country productivity, the USA topped the list. Research limitations/implications – This paper focuses on the publication traits of top ten open access journals of library & information science of the year 2011. A total of 373 papers from these ten journals are analyzed. Further studies can include more open access journals of this field for a period of more than one year. Practical implications – Scholars can benefit from insights into the scholarly contributions of top ten open access journals of 2011 in the field of library & information science. Originality/value – This paper provides valuable insights into the nature of academic publishing of open access journals of library & information science. It can help the researchers, professionals, teachers and students to understand the top open access journals, valuable contributions, highly cited journals, country productivity, and other parameters.
50
Willcocks, Leslie, Edgar A. Whitley, and Chrisanthi Avgerou. "The ranking of top IS journals: a perspective from the London School of Economics." European Journal of Information Systems 17, no. 2 (2008): 163–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2008.9.
Full text