Quality is in the eye of the beholder? An evaluation of impact factors and perception of journal prestige in the UK
Purchase on Springer.com
$39.95 / €34.95 / £29.95*
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.
A number of proxy measures have been used as indicators of journal quality. The most recent and commonly employed are journal impact factors. These measures are somewhat controversial, although they are frequently referred to in establishing the impact of published journal articles. Within psychology, little is known about the relationship between the ‘objective’ impact factors of journals and the ‘subjective’ ratings of prestige and perceived publishing difficulty amongst academics. In order to address this, a cross-sectional web-based survey was conducted in the UK to investigate research activity and academics’ views of journals within three fields of psychology; cognitive, health and social. Impact factors for each journal were correlated with individual academic’s perceptions of prestige and publishing difficulty for each journal. A number of variables pertaining to the individual academic and their place of work were assessed as predictors of these correlation values, including age, gender, institution type, and a measure of departmental research activity. The implications of these findings are discussed in relation to perceptions of journal prestige and publishing difficulty, higher education in general and the assessment of research activity within academic institutions.
- Adair, J. G., Vohra, N. (2003), The explosion of knowledge, references, and citations: Psychology’s unique response to a crisis. American Psychologist, 58: 15–23. CrossRef
- Andersen H. (1996), ACTA Sociologica på den internationale arena-hvad kan SSCI fortælle? Dansk Sociologi, 2: 72–8.
- Ansel, F., Duyck, W., De Baene, W., Brysbaert, M. (2004), Journal impact factors and self-citations: implications for psychological journals, American Psychologist, 59: 49–51. CrossRef
- Boor, M. (1982), The citation impact factor: Another dubious index of journal quality, American Psychologist, 37: 975–977. CrossRef
- Callaham, M., Wears, R. L., Weber, E. (2002), Journal prestige, publication bias, and other characteristics associated with citation of published studies in peer-reviewed journals, JAMA 5, 287(21): 2847–2850. CrossRef
- Chew, M., Villanueva, E. V., van Der Weyden, M. B. (2007), Life and times of the impact factor: retrospective analysis of trends for seven medical journals (1994–2005) and their Editors’ views, J R Soc Med., 100: 142–150. CrossRef
- Cole, S. (1989), Citations and the evaluation of individual scientists, Trends in Biochemical Science, 14: 9–13. CrossRef
- Frank, M. (2003), Impact factors: Arbiter of excellence? J Med Libr Assoc, 91(1): 4–6.
- Garfield, E. (1999), Journal impact factor: A brief review, CMAJ, 16: 979–980.
- Garfield, E. (2003), The meaning of the impact factor. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 3: 363–369.
- Garfield E., Sher I. H. (1963), Genetics Citation Index. Philadelphia, Pa: Institute for Scientific Information; July 1963. Available at: http://www.garfield.library.upenn.edu/essays/v7p515y1984.pdf. Accessibility verified November 29, 2005.
- HEFCE (2007, November), Research Excellence Framework. Retrieved January 30, 2008 from http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/hefce/2007/07_34
- Opthof, T. (1997), Sense and nonsense about the impact factor. Cardiovascular Research, 33: 1–7. CrossRef
- Patsopoulos, N. A., Analatos, A. A., Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2005), Relative citation impact of various study designs in the health sciences, JAMA, 293(19): 2362–2366. CrossRef
- Pursglove, J., Simpson, M. (2007), Benchmarking the performance of English universities, Benchmarking: An International Journal, 14(1): 102–122. CrossRef
- Saha, S., Saint, S., Christakis, D. A. (2003), Impact factor: a valid measure of journal quality? J Med Libr Assoc., 91(1): 42–46.
- Seglen, P. O. (1989), From bad to worse: evaluation by journal impact factor, Trends in Biochemical Sciences, 14: 326–327. CrossRef
- Seglen, P. O. (1997), Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research, BMJ, 314: 498–02.
- von Tunzelmann, N., Mbula, E. Kraemer (28 February 2003), Changes in Research Assessment Practices in Other Countries Since 1999. Final report. Retrieved February 20, 2008 from www.rareview.ac.uk /reports/Prac/ChangingPractices.doc
- Walters, G. D. (2006), Measuring the utility of journals in the crime-psychology field: Beyond the impact factor, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,. 57(13): 1804–1813. CrossRef
- Quality is in the eye of the beholder? An evaluation of impact factors and perception of journal prestige in the UK
Volume 81, Issue 2 , pp 333-345
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer Netherlands
- Additional Links
- Industry Sectors