Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.creatorChia-Lin Changen_US
dc.creatorMichael McAleeren_US
dc.creatorLes Oxleyen_US
dc.description.abstractThis paper examines the issue of coercive journal self citations and the practical usefulness of two recent journal performance metrics, namely the Eigenfactor score, which may be interpreted as measuring “Journal Influence”, and the Article Influence score, using the Thomson Reuters ISI Web of Science (hereafter ISI) data for 2009 for the 200 most highly cited journals in each of the Sciences and Social Sciences. The paper also compares the two new bibliometric measures with two existing ISI metrics, namely Total Citations and the 5-Year Impact Factor (5YIF) (including journal self citations) of a journal. It is shown that the Sciences and Social Sciences are different in terms of the strength of the relationship of journal performance metrics, although the actual relationships are very similar. Moreover, the Journal Influence and Article Influence journal performance metrics are shown to be closely related empirically to the two existing ISI metrics, and hence add little in practical usefulness to what is already known, except for eliminating the pressure arising from coercive journal self citations. These empirical results are compared with existing results in the bibliometrics literature.en_US
dc.relationMathematics and Computers in Simulation, Volume 93, Page(s) 190-197.en_US
dc.subjectTotal Citationsen_US
dc.subject5-Year Impact Factor (5YIF)en_US
dc.subjectJournal Influenceen_US
dc.subjectArticle Influenceen_US
dc.titleCoercive journal self citations, impact factor, Journal Influence and Article Influenceen_US
Appears in Collections:應用經濟學系


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.