Assessing the publication output on country level in the research field communication using Garfield’s Impact Factor

Moreno-Delgado, Alicia; Gorraiz, Juan; Repiso, Rafael

doi:10.1007/s11192-021-04006-w

Published: 16 May 2021

Assessing the publication output on country level in the research field communication using Garfield’s Impact Factor

Scientometrics volume 126, pages 5983–6000 (2021)Cite this article

414 Accesses
4 Citations
12 Altmetric
Metrics details

Abstract

The ever-increasing evaluation of science has led to the development of indicators at different levels. Our objective is to describe and analyze the publication output of those countries that were most active in the field between 2011 and 2020 according to the data retrieved for this category in Web of Science Core Collection. To this purpose, we are using Garfield’s Impact Factor and applying this indicator for countries instead of journals. Our results show that the most publication active countries are not those that make the most impact. We also confirm that English-speaking countries dominate the scenario in terms of number of publications and that states such as Spain and the Netherlands benefit from the Emerging Source Citation Index. Furthermore, we have found that at least 30% of most countries’ scientific production involves international collaboration and that the United States of America is the collaborator of choice in “Communication Studies”. Our study corroborates that our “country-based Impact factor” provides a quick and valuable bibliometric picture in good agreement with the results supplied by other indicators such as the Category Normalized Citation Impact (CNCI), the 5-year impact factor, or the Percentage of publications in the top 10%.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Notes

References

Archambault, É., Vignola-Gagné, É., Côté, G., Larivière, V., & Gingrasb, Y. (2006). Benchmarking scientific output in the social sciences and humanities: The limits of existing databases. Scientometrics, 68, 329–342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0115-z
Article Google Scholar
Arunachalam, S., & Doss, M. J. (2000). Mapping international collaboration in science in Asia through coauthorship analysis. Current Science, 79(5), 621–628. https://doi.org/10.2307/24105078
Article Google Scholar
Barnett, G. A., Danowski, J. A., Feeley, T. H., & Stalker, J. (2010). Measuring quality in communication doctoral education using network analysis of faculty-hiring patterns. Journal of Communication, 60(2), 388–411. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01487.x
Article Google Scholar
Barnett, G. A., & Feeley, T. H. (2011). Comparing the NRC and the faculty hiring network methods of ranking doctoral programs in communication. Communication Education, 60(3), 362–370. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2011.558202
Article Google Scholar
Barnett, G. A., Huh, C., Kim, Y., & Park, H. W. (2011). Citations among communication journals and other disciplines: A network analysis. Scientometrics, 88(2), 449–469. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0381-2
Article Google Scholar
Batagelj, V. (2008). Analysis of large networks with Pajek. Networks, 94, 22–27
Google Scholar
Blondel, V. D., Guillaume, J. L., Lambiotte, R., & Lefebvre, E. (2008). Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, 2008(10), 10008. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-5468/2008/10/P10008
Article MATH Google Scholar
Bornmann, L., & Leydesdorff, L. (2012). Citation impact of papers published from six prolific countries: A national comparison based on InCites data. Retrieved from http://arxiv.org/abs/1205.0680
Bornmann, L., & Marx, W. (2015). Methods for the generation of normalized citation impact scores in bibliometrics: Which method best reflects the judgements of experts? Journal of Informetrics, 9(2), 408–418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2015.01.006
Article Google Scholar
Cervi, L., Simelio, N., & Tejedor Calvo, S. (2020). Analysis of journalism and communication studies in Europe’s top ranked universities: Competencies aims, and courses. Journalism Practice. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2020.1762505
Article Google Scholar
Craig, R. T. (1999). Communication theory as a field. Communication Theory, 9(2), 119–161. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.1999.tb00355.x
Article Google Scholar
Csajbók, E., Berhidi, A., Vasas, L., & Schubert, A. (2007). Hirsch-index for countries based on essential science indicators data. Scientometrics, 73(1), 91–117. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1859-9
Article Google Scholar
De Filippo, D. (2013). Spanish scientific output in communication sciences in WOS. The scientific journals in SSCI (2007–12). Comunicar, 21(41), 25–34. https://doi.org/10.3916/C41-2013-02
Article Google Scholar
De Filippo, D., & Gorraiz, J. (2020). Is the emerging source citation index an aid to assess the citation impact in social science and humanities? Journal of Informetrics, 14(4), 101088. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2020.101088
Article Google Scholar
Garfield, E. (1955). Citation indexes for science. Science, 122, 108–111
Article Google Scholar
Garfield, E. (1972). Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation. Science, 178(4060), 471–479. https://doi.org/10.2307/1735096
Article Google Scholar
Garfield, E. (1976). Journal Citation Reports. A Bibliometric Analysis of References. (E. Garfield, Ed.). Institute for Science Information.
Gingras, Y., & Khelfaoui, M. (2018). Assessing the effect of the United States’ “citation advantage” on other countries’ scientific impact as measured in the web of science (WoS) database. Scientometrics, 114(2), 517–532. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2593-6
Article Google Scholar
Glänzel, W., Chi, P. S., Gumpenberger, C., & Gorraiz, J. (2016). Information sources-information targets: Evaluative aspects of the scientists’ publication strategies. In 21st international conference on science and technology indicators-STI 2016. Book of Proceedings (pp. 708–717).
Glänzel, W., & Moed, H. F. (2002). Journal impact measures in bibliometric research. Scientometrics, 53(2), 171–193. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014848323806
Article Google Scholar
Gómez Caridad, I., & Bordons, M. (2009). Limitaciones en el uso de los indicadores bibliométricos para la evaluación científica. Retrieved July 22, 2020, from https://digital.csic.es/handle/10261/9813
González-Riaño, M. G., Repiso, R., & López-Cózar, E. D. (2014). Repercusión de los rankings universitarios en la prensa española. Revista Española de Documentación Científica, 37(3), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2014.2.1128
Article Google Scholar
Gorraiz, J., Wieland, M., Ulrych, U., & Gumpenberger, C. (2020). De Profundis: A decade of bibliometric services under scrutiny. In Cinzia Daraio & Wolfgang Glänzel (Eds.), Evaluative informetrics: The art of metrics-based research assessment. (pp. 233–260). Springer.
Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(46), 16569–16572. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507655102
Article MATH Google Scholar
Hoeffel, C. (1998). Journal impact factors. Allergy, 53(12), 1225–1225. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1398-9995.1998.tb03848.x
Article Google Scholar
Huang, Y., Zhu, D., Lv, Q., Porter, A. L., Robinson, D. K. R., & Wang, X. (2017). Early insights on the emerging sources citation index (ESCI): An overlay map-based bibliometric study. Scientometrics, 111(3), 2041–2057. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2349-3
Article Google Scholar
Jacsó, P. (2009). The h-index for countries in web of science and scopus. Online Information Review, 33(4), 831–837. https://doi.org/10.1108/14684520910985756
Article Google Scholar
Kamada, T., & Kawai, S. (1988). A simple method for computing general position in displaying three-dimensional objects. Computer Vision, Graphics, and Image Processing, 41(1), 43–56.
Article Google Scholar
King, D. A. (2004). The scientific impact of nations. Nature, 430, 311–316
Article Google Scholar
Kwiek, M. (2018). International research collaboration and international research orientation: Comparative findings about European academics. Journal of Studies in International Education, 22(2), 136–160. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315317747084
Article Google Scholar
Lauf, E. (2005). National diversity of major international journals in the field of communication. Journal of Communication, 55(1), 139–151. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2005.tb02663.x
Article Google Scholar
Leydesdorff, L., & Probst, C. (2009). The delineation of an interdisciplinary specialty in terms of a journal set: The case of communication studies. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(8), 1709–1718. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21052
Article Google Scholar
Leydesdorff, L., Wouters, P., & Bornmann, L. (2016). Professional and citizen bibliometrics: Complementarities and ambivalences in the development and use of indicators-a state-of-the-art report. Scientometrics, 109, 2129–2150. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2150-8
Article Google Scholar
Meredith, M. (2004). Why do universities compete in the ratings game? An empirical analysis of the effects of the U.S. news and world report college rankings. Research in Higher Education, 45(5), 443–461. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:RIHE.0000032324.46716.f4
Article Google Scholar
Moed, H. F. (2016). A critical comparative analysis of five world university rankings. Scientometrics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2212-y
Article Google Scholar
Park, H. W., & Leydesdorff, L. (2009). Knowledge linkage structures in communication studies using citation analysis among communication journals. Scientometrics, 81(1), 157–175. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-2119-y
Article Google Scholar
Pritchard, A. (1969). Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics. Journal of Documentation, 25(4), 348–349
Google Scholar
Repiso, R., Castillo-Esparcia, A., & Torres-Salinas, D. (2019). Altmetrics, alternative indicators for web of science communication studies journals. Scientometrics, 119(2), 941–958. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03070-7
Article Google Scholar
Repiso, R., & Torres-Salinas, D. (2016). Características e implicaciones de la base de datos emerging sources citation index (Thomson Reuters): Las revistas en estado transitorio. Anuario ThinkEPI, 10, 234. https://doi.org/10.3145/thinkepi.2016.46
Article Google Scholar
Schmitz, C. C. (1993). Assessing the validity of higher education indicators. The Journal of Higher Education, 64(5), 503–521. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.1993.11778445
Article Google Scholar
Somoza-Fernández, M., Rodríguez-Gairín, J.-M., & Urbano, C. (2018). Journal coverage of the emerging sources citation index. Learned Publishing, 31(3), 199–204. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1160
Article Google Scholar
Sud, P., & Thelwall, M. (2016). Not all international collaboration is beneficial: The Mendeley readership and citation impact of biochemical research collaboration. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(8), 1849–1857. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23515
Article Google Scholar
Trabadela-Robles, J., Nuño-Moral, M.-V., Guerrero-Bote, V. P., & De-Moya-Anegón, F. (2020). Analysis of national scientific domains in the communication field (Scopus, 2003–2018). El Profesional de La Información. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2020.jul.18
Article Google Scholar
van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84, 523–538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3
Article Google Scholar
Van Raan, A. F. J. (1998). The influence of international collaboration on the impact of research results: Some simple mathematical considerations concerning the role of self-citations. Scientometrics, 42(3), 423–428. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02458380
Article Google Scholar

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the Vice-rectorate for Research of the Universidad Internacional de La Rioja by the financial support.

Funding

The present study has been financed by the Vice-Rectorate for Research, International University of La Rioja, Spain.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Universidad Internacional de La Rioja (UNIR), Av. de la Paz, 137, 26006, Logroño, La Rioja, Spain
Alicia Moreno-Delgado & Rafael Repiso
Department of Bibliometrics, Vienna University Library, University of Vienna, Boltzmanngasse 5, 1090, Vienna, Austria
Juan Gorraiz

Authors

Alicia Moreno-Delgado
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Juan Gorraiz
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Rafael Repiso
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

AMD: Investigation; Formal Analysis; Visualization; Writing – original draft. JG: Conceptualization; Supervision; Writing – review & editing. RR: Conceptualization; Methodology; Supervision; Validation; Visualization; Writing – review & editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alicia Moreno-Delgado.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Moreno-Delgado, A., Gorraiz, J. & Repiso, R. Assessing the publication output on country level in the research field communication using Garfield’s Impact Factor. Scientometrics 126, 5983–6000 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04006-w

Download citation

Received: 03 December 2020
Accepted: 17 April 2021
Published: 16 May 2021
Issue Date: July 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04006-w

Keywords

Bibliometrics
Impact factor
Communication studies
International collaboration
Web of science core collection
Scientific production