|
The
Impact Factor
This essay was originally published in the Current
Contents print editions June 20, 1994.
Librarians and information scientists have been evaluating
journals for at least 75 years. Gross and Gross conducted a
classic study of citation patterns in the '20s.1
Others, including Estelle Brodman with her studies in the '40s
of physiology journals and subsequent reviews of the process,
followed this lead.2 However,
the advent of the ISI® citation indexes made it
possible to do computer-compiled statistical reports not only on
the output of journals but also in terms of citation frequency.
And in the '60s we invented the journal "impact
factor." After using journal statistical data in-house to
compile the Science Citation Index®
(SCI®) for many years, ISI began
to publish Journal
Citation Reports® (JCR®)3
in 1975 as part of the SCI and the Social
Sciences Citation Index® (SSCI®).
Informed and careful use of these impact data is essential.
Users may be tempted to jump to ill-formed conclusions based on
impact factor statistics unless several caveats are considered.
Definition
The JCR provides quantitative tools for ranking,
evaluating, categorizing, and comparing journals. The impact
factor is one of these; it is a measure of the frequency with
which the "average article" in a journal has been
cited in a particular year or period. The annual JCR
impact factor is a ratio between citations and recent citable
items published. Thus, the impact factor of a journal is
calculated by dividing the number of current year citations to
the source items published in that journal during the previous
two years (see Figure 1).
| Figure 1: Calculation for journal impact
factor. |
| A= total cites in 1992 |
| B= 1992 cites to articles published in 1990-91
(this is a subset of A) |
| C= number of articles published in 1990-91 |
| D= B/C = 1992 impact factor |
The impact factor is useful in clarifying the
significance of absolute (or total) citation frequencies. It
eliminates some of the bias of such counts which favor large
journals over small ones, or frequently issued journals over
less frequently issued ones, and of older journals over newer
ones. Particularly in the latter case such journals have a
larger citable body of literature than smaller or younger
journals. All things being equal, the larger the number of
previously published articles, the more often a journal will be
cited.4, 5
Applications
There have been many innovative applications of
journal impact factors. The most common involve market research
for publishers and others. But, primarily, JCR
provides librarians and researchers with a tool for the
management of library journal collections. In market research,
the impact factor provides quantitative evidence for editors and
publishers for positioning their journals in relation to the
competition--especially others in the same subject category, in
a vertical rather than a horizontal or intradisciplinary
comparison. JCR
data may also serve advertisers interested in evaluating the
potential of a specific journal.
Perhaps the most important and recent use of
impact is in the process of academic evaluation. The impact
factor can be used to provide a gross approximation of the
prestige of journals in which individuals have been published.
This is best done in conjunction with other considerations such
as peer review, productivity, and subject specialty citation
rates. As a tool for management of library journal collections,
the impact factor supplies the library administrator with
information about journals already in the collection and
journals under consideration for acquisition. These data must
also be combined with cost and circulation data to make rational
decisions about purchases of journals.
The impact factor can be useful in all of these
applications, provided the data are used sensibly. It is
important to note that subjective methods can be used in
evaluating journals as, for example, by interviews or
questionnaires. In general, there is good agreement on the
relative value of journals in the appropriate categories.
However, the JCR makes possible the realization that
many journals do not fit easily into established categories.
Often, the only differentiation possible between two or three
small journals of average impact is price or subjective
judgments such as peer review.
Using the
Impact Factor Wisely
The Institute for Scientific Information®
(ISI®) does not depend on the impact factor alone
in assessing the usefulness of a journal, and neither should
anyone else. The impact factor should not be used without
careful attention to the many phenomena that influence citation
rates, as for example the average number of references cited in
the average article. The impact factor should be used with
informed peer review. In the case of academic evaluation for
tenure it is sometimes inappropriate to use the impact of the
source journal to estimate the expected frequency of a recently
published article. Again, the impact factor should be used with
informed peer review. Citation frequencies for individual
articles are quite varied.
There are many artifacts that can influence a
journal's impact and its ranking in journal lists, not the least
of which is the inclusion of review articles or letters. This is
illustrated in a study of the leading medical journals published
in the Annals of Internal Medicine. 6
Review
Articles
Review articles generally are cited more
frequently than typical research articles because they often
serve as surrogates for earlier literature, especially in
journals that discourage extensive bibliographies. In the JCR
system any article containing more than 100 references is coded
as a review. Articles in "review" sections of research
or clinical journals are also coded as reviews, as are articles
whose titles contain the word "review" or
"overview."
The Source Data Listing in the JCR
not only provides data on the number of reviews in each journal
but also provides the average number of references cited in that
journal's articles. Naturally, review journals have some of the
highest impact factors. Often, the first-ranked journal in the
subject category listings will be a review journal. For example,
under Biochemistry, the journal topping the list is Annual
Review of Biochemistry with an impact factor of 35.5 in
1992.
Methods
Articles
It is widely believed that methods articles
attract more citations than other types of articles. However,
this is not in fact true. Many journals devoted entirely to
methods do not achieve unusual impact. But it is true that among
the most cited articles in the literature there are some super
classics that give this overall impression. It should be noted
that the chronological limitation on the impact calculation
eliminates the bias super classics might introduce. Absolute
citation frequencies are biased in this way, but, on occasion, a
hot paper might affect the current impact of a journal.
Variation
Between Disciplines
Different specialties exhibit different ranges
of peak impact. That is why the JCR®
provides subject category listings. In this way, journals may be
viewed in the context of their specific field. Still, a
five-year impact may be more useful to some users and can be
calculated by combining the statistical data available from
consecutive years of the JCR (see Figure 2). It is
rare to find that the ranking of a journal will
change significantly within its designated category unless the
journal's influence has indeed changed.
Figure 2: Calculation for five-year impact
factor:
One year of citations to five years of articles. |
| A= citations in 1992 to articles published in
1987-91 |
| B= articles published in 1987-91 |
| C= A/B = five-year impact factor |
An alternative five-year impact can be
calculated based on adding citations in 1988-92 articles
published in the same five-year period. And yet another is
possible by selecting one or two earlier years as factor
"B" above.
Item-by-Item
Impact
While ISI® does manually code each
published source item, it is not feasible to code individually
the 12 million references we process each year. Therefore,
journal citation counts in JCR do not distinguish
between letters, reviews, or original research. So, if a journal
publishes a large number of letters, there will usually be a
temporary increase in references to those letters. Letters to
the Lancet may indeed be cited more often that
letters to JAMA or vice versa, but the overall
citation count recorded would not take this artifact into
account. Detailed computerized article-by-article analyses or
audits can be conducted to identify such artifacts.
Cited-Only
Journals in the JCR
Some of the journals listed in the JCR
are not citing journals, but are cited-only journals. This is
significant when comparing journals by impact factor because the
self-citations from a cited-only journal are not included in its
impact factor calculation. Self-citations often represent about
13% of the citations that a journal receives. The cited-only
journals with impact factors in the JCR Journal
Rankings and Subject Category Listing may be ceased or suspended
journals, superseded titles, or journals that are covered in the
science editions of Current Contents®,
but not a citation index.
Users can identify cited-only journals by
checking the JCR Citing Journal Listing. Furthermore,
users can establish analogous impact factors, (excluding
self-citations), for the journals they are evaluating using the
data given in the Citing Journal Listing (see Figure 3).
| Figure 3: Calculation for impact factor revised
to exclude self-citations. |
| A= citations in 1992 to articles published in
1990-91 |
| B= 1992 self-citations to articles published in
1990-91 |
| C= A - B = total citations minus self-citations
to recent articles |
| D= number of articles published 1990-91 |
| E= revised impact factor (C/D) |
| (see Table 1 for
numerical example) |
Title
Change
A user's knowledge of the content and history of
the journal studied is very important for appropriate
interpretation of impact factors. Situations such as those
mentioned above and others such as title change are very
important, and often misunderstood, considerations.
A title change affects the impact factor for two
years after the change is made. The old and new titles are not
unified unless the titles are in the same position
alphabetically. In the first year after the title change, the
impact is not available for the new title unless the data for
old and new can be unified. In the second year, the impact
factor is split. The new title may rank lower than expected and
the old title may rank higher than expected because only one
year of source data is included in its calculation (see Figure
4). Title changes for the current year and the previous year are
listed in the JCR® guide.
| Figure 4: Unified 1992 impact factor calculation for
title change. |
- A=1992 citations to articles
published in 1990-91 (a1 + a2)
- A1=those for new title
A2=those for superseded title
|
- B=number of articles published in
1990-91 (B1 + B2)
- B1=those for new title
- B2=those for superseded title
|
- C=unified impact factor (A/B)
- C1=A1/B1 = JCR
factor for the new title
- C2=A2/B2 = JCR factor
for the superseded title
|
Conclusions
The impact factor is a very useful tool for
evaluation of journals, but it must be used discreetly.
Considerations include the amount of review or other types of
material published in a journal, variations between disciplines,
and item-by-item impact. The journal's status in regard to
coverage in the ISI® databases as well as the
occurrence of a title change are also very important. In the
next essay we will look at some examples of how to put tools for
journal evaluation into use.
Dr. Eugene Garfield
Founder and Chairman Emeritus, ISI
Self-Citation
study of journals in the Reproductive Systems category of the
1992 SCI® Journal Citation
Reports® (JCR®).
Table 1: Calculation of impact factors without
self-citations.
| Reproductive Systems Journals |
(A/D)
JCR
Impact
Factor |
A
Cites in
1992 to
1990-91
Articles |
B
Self-cites
in 1992 to
1990-91
Articles |
C
(A-B)
Minus
Self-
Cites |
D
Articles
Published
1990-91
|
E
(C/D)
Revised
Impact
Factor |
| AM J REPROD IMMUNOL |
1.931 |
224 |
54 |
170 |
116 |
1.466 |
| ANIM REPROD SCI |
0.701 |
110 |
23 |
87 |
157 |
0.554 |
| BIOL REPROD |
3.257 |
726 |
265 |
461 |
530 |
2.757 |
| EUR J OBSTET GYN R B |
0.449 |
169 |
19 |
150 |
376 |
0.399 |
| HUM REPROD |
1.328 |
627 |
* |
627 |
472 |
1.328 |
| INVERTEBR REPROD DEV |
0.899 |
98 |
8 |
90 |
109 |
0.826 |
| J REPROD FERTIL |
2.211 |
1287 |
209 |
1078 |
582 |
1.852 |
| J REPROD IMMUNOL |
1.442 |
137 |
20 |
117 |
95 |
1.232 |
| MOL REPROD DEV |
2.003 |
597 |
107 |
490 |
298 |
1.644 |
| OXFORD REV REPROD B |
1.765 |
30 |
* |
30 |
17 |
1.765 |
| REPROD DOMEST ANIM |
0.565 |
39 |
2 |
37 |
69 |
0.536 |
| REPROD FERT DEVELOP |
1.493 |
221 |
40 |
181 |
148 |
1.223 |
| REPROD NUTR DEV |
0.579 |
84 |
10 |
74 |
145 |
0.510 |
| REPROD TOXICOL |
0.859 |
79 |
26 |
53 |
92 |
0.576 |
| SEMIN REPROD ENDOCR |
0.347 |
25 |
* |
25 |
72 |
0.347 |
| SEX PLANT REPROD |
1.659 |
136 |
38 |
98 |
82 |
1.195 |
* In 1992, Human Reproduction was not covered in a
citation index, but has been added to the Science Citation
Index® (SCI) for 1993. The 1992
issue of Oxford Reviews of Reproductive Biology was
not received in time to process its citations for ISI®'s
1992 database. Seminars in Reproductive Endocrinology
is not covered in a citation index.
Table 2: Comparison of JCR impact factors
to revised impact factors.
| Journals ranked by an impact factor |
Journals ranked by JCR impact
factor:
calculated without self-citations: |
|
| 1 |
BIOL REPROD |
3.257 |
BIOL REPROD |
2.757 |
| 2 |
J REPROD FERTIL |
2.211 |
J REPROD FERTIL |
1.852 |
| 3 |
MOL REPROD DEV |
2.003 |
OXFORD REV REPROD B |
1.765 |
| 4 |
AM J REPROD IMMUNOL |
1.931 |
MOL REPROD DEV |
1.644 |
| 5 |
OXFORD REV REPROD B |
1.765 |
AM J REPROD IMMUNOL |
1.466 |
| 6 |
SEX PLANT REPROD |
1.659 |
HUM REPROD |
1.328 |
| 7 |
REPROD FERT DEVELOP |
1.493 |
J REPROD IMMUNOL |
1.232 |
| 8 |
J REPROD IMMUNOL |
1.442 |
REPROD FERT DEVELOP |
1.223 |
| 9 |
HUM REPROD |
1.328 |
SEX PLANT REPROD |
1.195 |
| 10 |
INVERTEBR REPROD DEV |
0.899 |
INVERTEBR REPROD DEV |
0.826 |
| 11 |
REPROD TOXICOL |
0.859 |
REPROD TOXICOL |
0.576 |
| 12 |
ANIM REPROD SCI |
0.701 |
ANIM REPROD SCI |
0.554 |
| 13 |
REPROD NUTR DEV |
0.579 |
REPROD DOMEST ANIM |
0.536 |
| 14 |
REPROD DOMEST ANIM |
0.565 |
REPROD NUTR DEV |
0.510 |
| 15 |
EUR J OBSTET GYN R B |
0.449 |
EUR J OBSTET GYN R B |
0.399 |
| 16 |
SEMIN REPROD ENDOCR |
0.347 |
SEMIN REPROD ENDOCR |
0.347 |
|
References
1. Gross P L K, Gross E
M. College libraries and chemical education. Science
66:385-9, 1927.
2. Brodman E.
Methods of choosing physiology journals. Bull. Med.
Libr. Assn.
32:479-83, 1944.
3. SCI® Journal
Citation Reports®: a bibliometric
analysis of science journals in the ISI® database.
Philadelphia: Institute for Scientific Information, Inc.®,
1993.
4. Garfield E.
Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation. Science
178:471-9, 1972.
5. Citation indexing for
studying science. Nature 227:669-71, 1970.
6. Which medical
journals have the greatest impact? Ann. Intern. Med.
105:313-20, 1986.
Copyright ©2000 Institute
for Scientific Information
|