The citation impacts and citation environments of Chinese journals in mathematics

Abstract

Based on the citation data of journals covered by the China Scientific and TechnicalPapers and Citations Database (CSTPCD), we obtained aggregated journal-journal citation environments by applying routines developed specifically for this purpose.Local citation impact of journals is defined as the share of the total citations in a local citation environment, which is expressed as a ratio and can be visualized by the size of the nodes. The vertical size of the nodes varies proportionally to a journal's total 1 citation share, while the horizontal size of the nodes is used to provide citation information after correction for the within-journal (self-) citations. In the "citing" environment, the equivalent of the local citation performance can also be considered as a citation activity index. Using the "citing" patterns as variables one is able to map how the relevant journal environments are perceived by the collective of authors of a journal, while the "cited" environment reflects the impact of journals in a local environment. In this study, we analyze citation impacts of three Chinese journals in mathematics and compare local citation impacts with impact factors. Local citation impacts reflect a journal's status and function better than (global) impact factors. We also found that authors in Chinese journals prefer international instead of domestic ones as sources for their citations.

Korea Citation Index and Its Macro Bibliometrics

“…Rousseau et al (2001) analyzed the impact factor of CSCD and Leydesdorff and Bihui (2004) analyzed 37 English title journals among 991 in the CSCD. Zhou and Leydesdorff (2007) analyzed journal-to-journal citations in mathematics, and Zhou, Su, and Leydesdorff (2010) analyzed 3 disciplines in the CSSCI such as political science and Marxism, library and information science, and economics. Their findings are as follows: In 2007, there were 493 CSSCI journals compared to 1,866 in SSCI.…”

“…Because of history and size, a few studies have analyzed the Chinese Science Citation Database (CSCD) (Rousseau et al, 2001;Leydesdorff and Bihui, 2004;Zhou and Leydesdorff, 2007;Zhou, Su, and Leydesdorff, 2010;Yang et al, 2010;Su, Deng and Shen, 2012). However, only few studies introduced some aspects of non-English journal databases: Meneghini, Mugnaini and Packer (2006) for Brazilian database and Julia et al (2008) for Spanish database, and a few reports on national citation databases in Japan, Taiwan, India and Korea (Chen, 2004;Negishi, Sun and Shigi, 2004;Rabishankar and Anup, 2011;Ko, Cho and Park, 2011;Choi et al, 2013;Seo, Jung and Kim, 2013).…”

Internationalization of China's English‐language academic journals: An overview and three approaches

“…Among these journals, 4,983 (65.4%) were science, technology, and medicine (STM) journals, while 2,635 (34.6%) were from the humanities and social sciences (HSS). Although the number of Chinese academic journals has grown rapidly (Zhou & Leydesdorff, ), most of these journals are domestic oriented, that is, published in Chinese and mainly read by Chinese scholars (Guo, Xue, & Li, ; SAPPRFT, ; Xu, Yang, & Cong, ). Chinese scientific journals still lag behind international journals in international performance (He & Liu, ).…”

Seed journal citation network maps: A method based on network theory

“…More related to the objective and approach presented in this study is the work done by Leydesdorff and colleagues. In recent years, they have presented a methodology to visualize the citation‐impact environment of a given journal (Bornmann, Leydesdorff, & Marx, ; Leydesdorff, ; Zhou & Leydesdorff, ). Their approach makes a distinction between the citing and cited dimensions as two different perspectives on a journal's position (Leydesdorff, ).…”