Geometric journal impact factors correcting for individual highly cited articles
arXiv:1510.08874 · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2015.02.004
Abstract
Journal impact factors (JIFs) are widely used and promoted but have important limitations. In particular, JIFs can be unduly influenced by individual highly cited articles and hence are inherently unstable. A logical way to reduce the impact of individual high citation counts is to use the geometric mean rather than the standard mean in JIF calculations. Based upon journal rankings 2004-2014 in 50 sub-categories within 5 broad categories, this study shows that journal rankings based on JIF variants tend to be more stable over time if the geometric mean is used rather than the standard mean. The same is true for JIF variants using Mendeley reader counts instead of citation counts. Thus, although the difference is not large, the geometric mean is recommended instead of the arithmetic mean for future JIF calculations. In addition, Mendeley readership-based JIF variants are as stable as those using Scopus citations, confirming the value of Mendeley readership as an academic impact indicator.
References in corpus (2)
Cited by in corpus (13)
- Mendeley readership as a filtering tool to identify highly cited publications
- Are there too many uncited articles? Zero inflated variants of the discretised lognormal and hooked power law distributions
- Microsoft Academic: A multidisciplinary comparison of citation counts with Scopus and Mendeley for 29 journals
- Open Access Books in the Humanities and Social Sciences: an Open Access Altmetric Advantage
- Microsoft Academic Automatic Document Searches: Accuracy for Journal Articles and Suitability for Citation Analysis
- National, disciplinary and temporal variations in the extent to which articles with more authors have more impact: Evidence from a geometric field normalised citation indicator
- Impact Factors and the Central Limit Theorem: Why Citation Averages Are Scale Dependent
- Predicting article quality scores with machine learning: The UK Research Excellence Framework
- Should Citations be Counted Separately from Each Originating Section
- In which fields do higher impact journals publish higher quality articles?
- Citation count distributions for large monodisciplinary journals
- Evidence for studying interactions between science and policy: An exploration of scholarly and policy references in Overton-indexed policy documents
- More Precise Methods for National Research Citation Impact Comparisons