What is a kinesiology journal?¹

Abstract

This paper responds to the issues raised by Cardinal, Schary, and Kim (2014 ) regarding a recent study published in Comprehensive Psychology ( Knudson, 2013a ). The issues raised by Cardinal and coworkers are important and related to the misuse of bibliometrics like the impact factor, but are also consistent with the data and interpretation in the Knudson (2013a ) article. Both these articles correctly point out problems with the misuse of bibliometric variables in evaluating journals and the adverse consequences this has for research in Kinesiology and other fi elds. More research documenting the limitations and appropriate use of bibliometrics in evaluating Kinesiology-related journals, integrated with surveys of scholars defi ning the fi eld of Kinesiology and its journals, are important solutions to the problems of Kinesiology identity and impact factor obsession.Cardinal, et al . (2014 ) recently outlined several issues related to a study on the impact and prestige of Kinesiology journals ( Knudson, 2013a ). I appreciate their commentary bringing more attention to this topic because I share their concern about the misuse of bibliometrics like the impact factor and its potential adverse eff ects on journals and scholarship, as well as the visibility of Kinesiology scholarship in academia which has been the impetus to this recent line of my research. Cardinal, et al . (2014 ) were critical of the methods reported in establishing the sample of journals related to Kinesiology and how the results of the Knudson (2013a ) study might be misused. This paper is a response to their article organized in order of the issues they bring forward. Some of the methodology concerns noted by Cardinal and colleagues are unavoidable in any study of journals in an ill-defi ned, multi-disciplinary fi eld like Kinesiology, using the variety of databases and indexes, subject headings, and bibliometrics available today. This paper also argues it is inaccurate to be critical of the Knudson (2013a ) report regarding potential misuse of the results, given the article clearly noted the history of misuse of bibliometrics and cited the large body of literature arguing against it. In reality, reasoned and critical application of the Knudson (2013a ) results and future research are needed to decrease the obsession with the impact factor and its negative consequences on science. The Ill-Defi ned Field of Kinesiology and Kinesiology JournalsWhile it is fairly well-known in North America that the term "Kinesiology" refers to the academic study of human movement and physical activity, there is, however, less consensus on how Kinesiology is implemented within university academic programs, in scholarly research, and in peer-reviewed journals. Knudson (2013a ) andCardinal, et al . (2014 ) both correctly note that the fi eld of Kinesiology is not uniquely indexed as an academic subject area in major citation databases, so journals related to human movement are listed in numerous other subject headings/categories. The fi eld of Physical Educ...