Scientometrics

, Volume 35, Issue 1, pp 45–58 | Cite as

A comparison of Australian university output using journal impact factors

  • G. Davis
  • Pamela Royle
Article

Abstract

We weighted the output of SCI items from Australian universities using journal impact factors. This provides us with an accessible quality indicator of science journal publishing, and allow us to scale for institutional size in terms of output and research staff. Use of this indicator for the 20 pre-1987 Australian universities demonstrates that although some universities rank highly on output, when scaled for institutional size they are overtaken by some of the smaller, more recently established universities.

Keywords

Impact Factor Quality Indicator Science Journal Research Staff Journal Publishing 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    P. Bourke, L. Butler, A Crisis for Australian Science?Performance Indicators Project, Monograph Series No. 1, The Australian National University, Canberra, 1994.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    P. Bourke, L. Butler, SCI works well, especially in Melbourne,The Australian, March 22 (1995) 29.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    F. Larkin, Citation index too inconsistent for research assessment,The Australian, March 22 (1995) 29.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    I. Lowe, Useful insights from snapshot of science,The Australian, March 22 (1995) 28.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    B. Moulden, Research figures ignore size of campuses,The Australian, March 22 (1995) 28.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    E. Garfield, The impact factor,Current Contents, June 20, No. 25 (1994) 3–8.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    S. Hill, P. Murphy,Quantitative Indicators of Australian Academic Research, National Board of Employment, Education and Training, Commissioned Report No. 27, Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra, 1994.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    P. Royle, R. Over, The use of bibliometric indicators to measure the research productivity of Australian academics,Australian Academic and Research Libraries, 25 (1994) No. 2, 77–88.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    P. O. Seglen, The skewness of science,Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 43 (1992) No. 9, 628–638.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    P. R. McAllister, R. C. Anderson, F. Narin, Comparison of peer and citation assessment of the influence of scientific journals,Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 31 (1980) No. 3, 147–152.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    National Board of Employment, Education and Training,Research Performance Indicators Survey, AGPS, Canberra, 1993.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    M. P. Carpenter, F. Gibbs, M. Harris, J. Irvine, B. R. Martin, F. Narin, Biblioemtric profiles for British academic institutions: An experiment to develop research output indicators,Scientometrics, 14 (1988) 213–233.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    L. Leydesdorff, The science citation index and the measurement of national performance in terms of scientific publications,Scientometrics, 17 (1989) 111–120.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    M. J. Osborne, Seven delusions of grandeur,Campus Review, June 24–30 (1993) 9.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    P. L. Royle, G. E. Davis, Quality and distribution of Australian science journal publishing, Fifth International Conference on Scientometrics and Bibliometrics, Chicago, 1995.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    P. Royle, G. Davis, Signs of life as science citations improve,Campus Review, Feb 9–15 (1995) 5.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    P. Bourke, L. Butler, Research: The achievers,Campus Review, May 26 (1993) 7.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    M. Brennan, Australia: The big seven — the false elite? — universities,Australian Financial Review, June 3 (1993) 21.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    D. Bruce, P. Pockley, Australia: Tension in uni ranks over elitist push,The Age (Melbourne), May 19 (1993) 7.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    S. Maclean, Australia: quest for quality splits tertiary ranks,The Age (Melbourne), March 15 (1994) 16.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    P. Pockley, Australia: Big seven universities fight for a better funding deal,The Age (Melbourne), May 17 (1993) 3.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    I. Lowe, Bold words mask spending shortfall,New Scientist, 20 May (1995) 47.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    M. Brennan, ‘Big seven’ debate must focus on community benefit — not institutions or researchers,Campus Review, June 10–16 (1993) 9.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. Davis
    • 1
  • Pamela Royle
    • 1
  1. 1.The School of Mathematics & the Borchardt LibraryLa Trobe UniversityBundoora 3083(Australia)

Personalised recommendations