Hierarchical networks of scientific journals

Abstract

Academic journals are the repositories of mankind's gradually accumulating knowledge of the surrounding world. Just as knowledge is organized into classes ranging from major disciplines, subjects and fields, to increasingly specific topics, journals can also be categorized into groups using various metric. In addition, they can be ranked according to their overall influence. However, according to recent studies, the impact, prestige and novelty of journals cannot be characterized by a single parameter such as, for example, the impact factor. To increase understanding of journal impact, the knowledge gap we set out to explore in our study is the evaluation of journal relevance using complex multi-dimensional measures. Thus, for the first time, our objective is to organize journals into multiple hierarchies based on citation data. The two approaches we use are designed to address this problem from different perspectives. We use a measure related to the notion of m-reaching centrality and find a network that shows a journal's level of influence in terms of the direction and efficiency with which information spreads through the network. We find we can also obtain an alternative network using a suitably modified nested hierarchy extraction method applied to the same data. In this case, in a self-organized way, the journals become branches according to the major scientific fields, where the local structure of the branches reflect the hierarchy within the given field, with usually the most prominent journal (according to other measures) in the field chosen by the algorithm as the local root, and more specialized journals positioned deeper in the branch. This can make the navigation within different scientific fields and subfields very simple, and equivalent to navigating in the different branches of the nested hierarchy. We expect this to be particularly helpful, for example, when choosing the most appropriate journal for a given manuscript. According to our results, the two alternative hierarchies show a somewhat different, but also consistent, picture of the intricate relations between scientific journals, and, as such, they also provide a new perspective on how scientific knowledge is organized into networks.

The “space of physics journals”: topological structure and the Journal Impact Factor

“…The visualization of the SPJ is based on the use of multidimensional scaling (or MDS) (cf. Zhu et al (2015); Palla et al (2015); Leydesdorff et al (2017)). MDS is a technique that represents similarity data as distances between points in low-dimensional geometric space Borg et al (2013).…”

An equity-oriented rethink of global rankings with complex networks mapping development

“…We perform for both algorithms hierarchical community detection by recursive partitioning, an approach already explored in Refs. 69 , 81 , 82 . In our multi-step procedure, subsequent detection is applied to partition the communities obtained at the previous stage, as long as an iteration condition is satisfied.…”

Emergence of Leader-Follower Hierarchy Among Players in an On-Line Experiment

“…Here we adopt the hierarchy measure named as the Global Reaching Centrality, H GRC , which is based on the in-homogeneity of the reach distribution of the nodes 28 , and already proved to be an intuitive and successful approach in a number of studies 10,32,33 . The m-reach of a node i, denoted by C m (i) is given by the fraction of nodes that can be reached from i in at most m-steps.…”