Relationship between Journal-Ranking Metrics for a Multidisciplinary Set of Journals

Perera, Upeksha; Wijewickrema, Manjula

doi:10.1353/pla.2018.0003

Cited by 9 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To determine the ranking of the journals in which the articles in our dataset were published, we first used the list of journal rankings by year at Scimago Journal Rank (SJR) to download rankings of all of the journals represented in our dataset from years 2006–2020. We chose the Scimago Journal Rank to rank journals by impact factor (IF), following Perera and Wijewickrema’s observations [ 57 ]. We then divided up the journal IFs into three intervals: 2006–2010, 2011–2015 and 2016–2020, and determined the average IF of each interval for each journal.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disciplinary gender balance, research productivity, and recognition of men and women in academia

Sá,

Cowley,

Shahrin

et al. 2023

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gender disparities in science have become a salient concern for policy makers and researchers. Previous studies have documented a gender gap in research productivity and recognition in the sciences, and different reasons for this gap have been proposed. In this study, we examine four academic fields with different proportions of men and women in their population. We address the following questions: What is the relationship between the gendered make-up of a field and the productivity and recognition of men and women scientists in that academic field? What is the relationship between the publication patterns of men and women in different academic fields and their productivity and recognition? We find that gendered patterns of productivity and recognition favour men in man-dominated subfields (Mathematical Physics and Software Engineering), while women were more productive and highly cited in one woman-dominated subfield (Nursing), though not in another (Psychology). Nursing, a woman-gendered field, provides an interesting counterpoint to the most usual findings regarding gender disparities in academia. Our findings highlight the need to disaggregate academic fields and to bring to the forefront other disciplines that remain under investigated in analyses of gender gaps to potentially elucidate conflicting findings in the literature.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disciplinary gender balance, research productivity, and recognition of men and women in academia

Sá,

Cowley,

Shahrin

et al. 2023

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Journal self-citations are removed, and the project claims to adjust for the differing citation rates of different fields by calibrating for reference list length (Eigenfactor, n.d.). It is thus a kind of prestige ranking (Perera & Wijewickrema, 2018;Taylor & Francis, 2020). The H-Index can be used to rank journals and individuals.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring Journal Success

Forsyth¹

2020

Journal of the American Planning Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

is still owned and edited by the American Planning Association (APA). A question APA members ask periodically is how they know JAPA is a success. An expanding number of quantitative indicators, such as the Journal Impact Factor and CiteScore, appear to answer this question. Do they? Unsurprisingly, there has been quite a bit of debate on journal success measures as editors, authors, publishers, and readers grapple with how to assess journal quality and impact. Quantitative methods, or bibliometrics, have proponents, and indeed they do measure some items of value in planning (Stiftel, 2011). However, they are heavily influenced by factors that vary across fields and across specialty areas within a field or discipline. These areas of variation include patterns of sourcing within specialties (for citations), levels of subscription and pirating (for downloads), or even the social media savvy of individual authors and editors (for Altmetrics). In all of this quantification, the central issue of article and journal research quality can be lost. For a journal such as JAPA the long-term influence on planning and policy is also important and not well assessed by these measures. The bottom line is there are many imperfect measures, and some of the most promoted are the least useful.

show abstract

Mapping the evaluation results between quantitative metrics and meta-synthesis from experts’ judgements: evidence from the Supply Chain Management and Logistics journals ranking

Yuan

et al. 2019

Soft Comput

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Relationship between Journal-Ranking Metrics for a Multidisciplinary Set of Journals

Cited by 9 publications

References 2 publications

Disciplinary gender balance, research productivity, and recognition of men and women in academia

Disciplinary gender balance, research productivity, and recognition of men and women in academia

Measuring Journal Success

Mapping the evaluation results between quantitative metrics and meta-synthesis from experts’ judgements: evidence from the Supply Chain Management and Logistics journals ranking

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About