Search results

The purpose of this paper is to compare the journal impact rankings of the open access SCImago Journal & Country Rank (SJR) database and the subscription‐based Journal Citation Reports (JCR).

The paper looks at the SJR database which offers essential scientometric information for more than 17,000 scholarly and professional journals based on data licensed from Elsevier's Scopus database and compares this with the JCR database.

The open access SJR database offers very informative new insights to complement those that have been provided by the JCR for more than three decades by the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) and its successor, the Thomson (later Thomson‐Reuters) company. Especially valuable are its features of weighting the citations received based on the prestige of the citing journals, the (partial) exclusion of journal self‐citations, and the broader base of source journals. They provide new opportunities to analyse and understand their effects on the ranking of journals.

The paper provides useful information on the open access SJR and JCR databases and their effects on the ranking of journals.

The purpose of this paper is to explore relative deprivation and implicit bias in library and information science research publications of Africa and other continents.

Research design used for this study is descriptive survey research. Specifically, the study will adopt both web content analysis and survey to collect data. The content analysis covers the whole continents of the world: Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, Latin America, Middle East, Northern America, Pacific Region and Western Europe; using the Webometrics World Ranking of Universities and the SCImago/Scopus Journal Ranking. Library and information science was used as the search and control parameter. The scopes covered by the research are: 1. Ascertaining the visible publishing and assessment standards of top library and information science (LIS) journals, which was evaluated using Kleinert and Wager (2010)'s study.

It was found out among others that editors making fair and unbiased decisions as policy is seen in 33% of the journals, which is very poor. All the structural disparities, such as presence ranking, impact ranking, excellence ranking, etc. were favouring Europe and the Americas mainly. As much as rejection is getting to these respondents, research generally is also suffering by missing out on some untapped knowledge and ideas from these deprived populations. Many authors are losing faith in their capabilities and are now afraid of venturing into tedious research exercises because it will most likely be rejected either ways.

It is an established fact that social media gains research impact and attracts international collaborations. In support, studies such as Hassan et al. (2019) reported the fact that tweet mentions of articles with positive sentiment to more visibility and citations. They claim that cited articles in either positive or neutral tweets have a more significant impact than those not cited at all or cited in negative tweets. In addition, Hassan et al. (2020) equally highlighted tweet coupling as a social media methodology useful for clustering scientific publications. Despite the fact that social media have these influences on research and publications visibility and presence, the context of the present research did cover this scope of study. The study focused mainly on sources from Scopus as well as results from responses. Further studies can be carried out on this area.

Research studies linking “Black Articles Matter” to relative deprivation and implicit bias in research publications, especially in library and information discipline, are very rare. Also, the scope of approach of the study is quite different and interesting.

Much has been analyzed regarding the origins and the impact of rankings and metrics on policies, behaviors, and missions of universities. Surprisingly, little attention has been allocated to describing and analyzing the emergence of metrics as a new action field. This industry, fueled by the “new public management” policy perspectives that operate at the backstage of the contemporary pervasive “regime of excellence,” still remains a black box worth exploring in depth. This paper intends to fill this loophole. It first sets the stage for this new action field by stressing the differences between the policy fields of higher education in the United States and Europe, as a way to understand the specificities of the use of metrics and rankings on both continents. The second part describes the actors of the field, which productive organizations they build, what skills they combine, which products they put on the market, and their shared norms and audiences.

The purpose of this paper is to make a quantitative analysis and compare the scientific productivity in the area of engineering among the BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China) countries.

The data were collected from SCImago. Various parameters such as number of articles and citable articles, world share and rank, citations per paper and h-index, and international collaboration were analyzed.

There was a fluctuation trend in the pattern of international collaboration among the BRIC countries during the period. Among the top countries, China ranked first in the world in terms of number of articles in the field of engineering research, whereas India was at the 8th rank, Russia was at the 12th rank and Brazil was at the 18th rank. Among the BRIC countries, Russia slipped three positions from being at the 7th rank in 1996 to being at the 10th rank in 2016, while others improved their ranks.

The results of this study reveal publication trends and collaboration pattern of BRIC countries in the field of engineering which may be useful for the academic fraternity and decision makers.

The purpose of this paper is to visualize the structure of SCImago Journal & Country Rank (SJR) coverage of the extensive citation network of Scopus journals, examining this bibliometric portal through an alternative approach, applying clustering and visualization techniques to a combination of citation-based links.

Three SJR journal-journal networks containing direct citation, co-citation and bibliographic coupling links are built. The three networks were then combined into a new one by summing up their values, which were later normalized through geo-normalization measure. Finally, the VOS clustering algorithm was executed and the journal clusters obtained were labeled using original SJR category tags and significant words from journal titles.

The resultant scientogram displays the SJR structure through a set of communities equivalent to SJR categories that represent the subject contents of the journals they cover. A higher level of aggregation by areas provides a broad view of the SJR structure, facilitating its analysis and visualization at the same time.

This is the first study using Persson’s combination of most popular citation-based links (direct citation, co-citation and bibliographic coupling) in order to develop a scientogram based on Scopus journals from SJR. The integration of the three measures along with performance of the VOS community detection algorithm gave a balanced set of clusters. The resulting scientogram is useful for assessing and validating previous classifications as well as for information retrieval and domain analysis.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the scientific performance of universities by extending the application of the h‐index from the individual to the institutional level. A ranking of the world's top universities based on their h‐index scores was produced. The geographic distribution of the highly ranked universities by continent and by country was also analysed.

This study uses bibliometric analysis to rank the universities. In order to calculate their h‐index the numbers of papers and citations in each university were gathered from Web of Science, including the Science Citation Index and Social Science Citation Index. Authority control dealing with variations in university names ensured the accuracy of each university's number of published journal papers and the subsequent statistics of their citations.

It was found that a high correlation exists between the h‐index ranking generated in this study and that produced by Shanghai Jiao Tong University. The results confirm the validity of the h‐index in the assessment of research performance at the university level.

The h‐index has been used to evaluate research performance at the institutional level in several recent studies; however these studies evaluated institutions' performance only in certain disciplines or in a single country. This paper measures the research performance of universities all over the world, and the applicability of the h‐index at the institutional level was validated by calculating the correlation between the ranking result of the h‐index and the ranking by the Shanghai Jiao Tong University.

The purpose of this paper is to understand the scholarly contributions to the field of marketing by analyzing top ten journals of marketing.

The marketing journals were selected using SciMago marketing journal list, and SCOPUS database was used to identify the publications of the journals. A total of 9,190 articles were analyzed having 562,322 citation references. Methodologies like Wordle and Gephi were used to understand the most researched keywords and co-citation analysis among top five researchers. This paper also captured the information on most cited article along with author, most published author, most publishing country, most publishing university, the year with maximum publications and most used keywords.

The analysis indicates that “Kumar, V.” is most published author, that is, 68 publications, the most cited article is “On the evaluation of structural equation models” by Bagozzi and Yi (1988) with 6989 citations. The USA contributed the highest 6,720 publications, while University of Pennsylvania, Wharton School topped the list with 235 articles. In 2009, highest publication work was done by publishing 382 articles. “Game theory”, “Pricing” and “Advertising” are most used keywords which have been discussed in the literature.

This analysis will help researchers in understanding the growth in the field of the marketing in recent years and possible direction it could take in future. However, this paper considered only top ten marketing journals as listed in SciMago marketing journal list; therefore, future researchers may incorporate more research journals to get a clearer picture of the field of marketing.

This paper is one of the first attempts in recent time to understand the research work in the field of marketing considering top ten journals.

The paper's aim is to propose a core journal decision method, called the local impact factor (LIF), which can evaluate the requirements of the local user community by combining both the access rate and the weighted impact factor, and by tracking citation information on the local users' articles.

Many institutions with a limited budget can subscribe only to the most valuable journals for their users. The importance of a journal to a local community can be calculated in many ways. This paper takes both global and local access frequency and journal citations into consideration. The method of weighted web page link analysis is adopted.

This paper finds that the weighted page rank may be used efficiently in the core journal decisions. Experimental results demonstrate that the proposed LIF can effectively suggest journals to local users better than existing methods (i.e. impact factor or the local journal rank).

This research requires the determination of the thesis scores, which needs authorisation from the authors. If the scores are not available, the scores may be subjectively assigned or retrieved from the other resources.

A case study in National Cheng Kung University was conducted to show that the LIF can be used to help library managers evaluate the real demands of local community users.

Rather than existing research, this paper focuses on the utilisation and requirements of local community users and also finds the contributions of citation information to be significant and critical.

With over 3,000 academic journals in the fields of Business and Economics, most academics face a hard time selecting an adequate journal to submit their work to. In today's demanding academic environment and with the presence of different journal ranking lists (JRLs), the selection becomes more difficult when considering employment, promotion and funding. The purpose of this paper is to explore key differences among multiple JRLs pertinent to the latter common objectives. An extensive analysis is conducted to compare the content of journals in the Australian Business Deans Council (ABDC) Journal Quality list, Scopus and Web of Science (WoS) in the fields of Business and Economics. Then, a case of a university with medium research output is considered where scholarly performance evaluation is based on the ABDC Journal Quality List.

After ranking journals in the fields of Business and Economics based on SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) indicator, JCR's Journal Impact Factor (JIF) and JCR's Eigenfactor (EF), a methodology is proposed to categorize journals in the three JRLs into the same categorization adopted by ABDC. The latter establishes a way to compare the four JRLs under consideration and serves as a basis to compare and analyze the content of journals in the ABDC Journal Quality list, Scopus and WoS. As a proxy impact metric, a normalized citation count is associated with each article based on Google Scholar. The publications of the considered university are then evaluated from the perspective of the four JRLs in terms of citation-based impact and quality while considering the exposure to popular world university ranking tables.

For journals classified under fourth tier by ABDC, over 53 and 59% are not indexed by Scopus and WoS, respectively. In this case study, over 42% of the publications appear in journals that are not listed in JCR despite the fact that over 94% of them are listed by the SJR list. Generally, publications that appear in journals listed by JCR achieve, on a yearly average, significantly higher citation rates when compared to those that appear in journals listed in ABDC and SJR Lists.

A four-tier mapping is proposed for consistent comparison among JRLs. Normalized citation count associated with each article based on Google Scholar is employed for evaluation. The findings provide recommendations for scholars, administrators and global universities, including Euro-Med Universities, on which JRL can be more influential for both faculty development and positioning of the university.

This paper aims to map information literacy literature in social sciences and humanities published during the period of 2001-2012.

The data for the study are obtained from Scopus, accessible at www.scopus.com. Study used the Transformative Activity Index (TAI) and relative citation impact (RCI) to know the impact of most productive countries and prolific institutions. The SCImago Journal and Country Rank accessible at www.scimagojr.com/ was used to determine the SCImago Journal Rank and source normalized impact per paper.

The study found that 1990 documents originating from 79 countries were published in this study area. These papers are published in 160 journals with an average ∼12.51 papers per journal. These papers have been cited 10,025 times with ∼5.0. average citations per publication. Study also found that information literacy literature is published in 16 languages and the majority of the papers are in English, 1,879 (94.4 per cent). The highest growth of publications (106.7 per cent) was found in 2005. The USA contributed the highest number, 1,035 (52 per cent) papers. Moreover, of the 15 most productive countries, three recorded TAIs >100, and 12 countries recorded TAIs <100. In all, 160 institutions worldwide have contributed in information literacy research. Study also found that maximum literature published on the subject by a single author is 828 (41.6 per cent). Universidad de Granada, Granada, Spain has produced the highest number of papers (24, or 1.2 per cent) and received 61 (0.6 per cent) citations, while University of Strathclyde has the highest RCI (∼2.7) for its publications. Pintos, María from Universidad de Granada has published the maximum number of papers (18) that have been cited 78 times.

The study endeavors to showcase information literacy research outcomes in social sciences and humanities. It involves quantitative analysis of the literature in this domain using bibliographic elements such as keywords, authors, affiliation, publication and citations.

No study has been conducted so far to map the information literacy literature in social sciences and humanities. Study will be useful in understanding the progress on information literacy in the area of social sciences and humanities. The study is significant for social scientists to foster further research in this emerging area.