Advertisement

Scientometrics

, Volume 109, Issue 3, pp 2031–2048 | Cite as

Designing a model to evaluate scholarly publications with special reference to social sciences in India

  • Bapan Kumar Maity
  • Sudip Ranjan Hatua
Article
  • 280 Downloads

Abstract

One of the most popular methods to measure the quality of journal is impact factor. However this may not be the only criteria to evaluate a journal. It has its own limitations. The present work gives an alternative model to evaluate the quality of a journal. To test this model the present work used 17 popular journals on Social Sciences specifically in the areas of Economics, Political Science, and Sociology published in India during 2012–2014. The test proved to be successful. This model can be applied to any journal to find its quality. Three approaches have been considered, namely, physical presentation, reference studies and citation analysis. The model, named journal quality point (JQP), is suggested as a feasible technique to evaluate the quality of a journal.

Keywords

Journal evaluation Journal ranking Journal quality Social Science Journal Impact factor 

References

  1. Asundi, A. Y., & Kabin, S. H. (1996). Evolving criteria for identification and selection core periodicals in a subject: A case of Indian horticulture. Library Science with a Slant to Documentation, 33(2), 73–83.Google Scholar
  2. Bhatta, K., & Gandhi, D. N. (2003). The impact factor: Views and evaluation. SRELS Journal of Information Management, 40(4), 179–198.Google Scholar
  3. Coelho, P. M. Z., Antunes, C. M. F., Costa, H. M. A., Kroon, E. G., Lima, M. C., & Linardi, P. M. (2003). The use and misuse of the impact factors a parameter for evaluation of scientific publication quality: A proposal to rationalize its application. Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research, 36(12), 1605–1612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Hunt, R. K. (1990). Journal deselection in a biomedical research library: A mediated mathematical approach. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, 78(1), 45–48.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. Kreider, J. (1999, April). The correlation of local citation data with citation reports. Library Resources and Technical Services, 43, 92–96.Google Scholar
  6. Leiding, R. (2005). Using citation checking of undergraduate honors thesis bibliographies to evaluate library collection. College & Research Libraries, 66(5), 417–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Nagaraja, A., & Vasanthakumar, M. (2011). Comparison of web of science and scopus impact factors of Indian journals. Library Philosophy and Practice. Retrieved April 29, 2013, from: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/596.
  8. Najman, M., & Hewitt, B. (2003). The validity of publication and citation counts for sociology and other selected disciplines. Journal of Sociology, 39(1), 62–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Nisonger, T. E. (May 2000). Use of the journal citation reports for, serials management in research libraries: An investigation of the effect of self-citation on journal rankings in library and information science and genetics. College & Research Libraries, 263–275.Google Scholar
  10. Pan, R. K., & Fortuato, S. (2014). Author impact factor: Tracking the dynamics of individual scientific impact. Scientific Reports. Published online 2014 May 12. doi: 10.1038/srep04880. Retrived August 21, 2016.

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Research ScholarRabindra Bharati UniversityKolkataIndia
  2. 2.Library and Information Science DepartmentRabindra Bharati UniversityKolkataIndia

Personalised recommendations