Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/2440/98082
Citations
Scopus Web of Science® Altmetric
?
?
Type: Journal article
Title: How to rank journals
Author: Bradshaw, C.
Brook, B.
Citation: PLoS One, 2016; 11(3):e0149852-1-e0149852-15
Publisher: Public Library of Science
Issue Date: 2016
ISSN: 1932-6203
1932-6203
Statement of
Responsibility: 
Corey J. A. Bradshaw, Barry W. Brook
Abstract: There are now many methods available to assess the relative citation performance of peer-reviewed journals. Regardless of their individual faults and advantages, citation-based metrics are used by researchers to maximize the citation potential of their articles, and by employers to rank academic track records. The absolute value of any particular index is arguably meaningless unless compared to other journals, and different metrics result in divergent rankings. To provide a simple yet more objective way to rank journals within and among disciplines, we developed a κ-resampled composite journal rank incorporating five popular citation indices: Impact Factor, Immediacy Index, Source-Normalized Impact Per Paper, SCImago Journal Rank and Google 5-year h-index; this approach provides an index of relative rank uncertainty. We applied the approach to six sample sets of scientific journals from Ecology (n = 100 journals), Medicine (n = 100), Multidisciplinary (n = 50); Ecology + Multidisciplinary (n = 25), Obstetrics & Gynaecology (n = 25) and Marine Biology & Fisheries (n = 25). We then cross-compared the κ-resampled ranking for the Ecology + Multidisciplinary journal set to the results of a survey of 188 publishing ecologists who were asked to rank the same journals, and found a 0.68–0.84 Spearman’s ρ correlation between the two rankings datasets. Our composite index approach therefore approximates relative journal reputation, at least for that discipline. Agglomerative and divisive clustering and multi-dimensional scaling techniques applied to the Ecology + Multidisciplinary journal set identified specific clusters of similarly ranked journals, with only Nature & Science separating out from the others. When comparing a selection of journals within or among disciplines, we recommend collecting multiple citation-based metrics for a sample of relevant and realistic journals to calculate the composite rankings and their relative uncertainty windows.
Keywords: Humans; Cluster Analysis; Ecology; Medicine; Bibliometrics; Internet; Periodicals as Topic; Journal Impact Factor
Description: Published: March 1, 2016
Rights: © 2016 Bradshaw, Brook. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
RMID: 0030044838
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0149852
Grant ID: http://purl.org/au-research/grants/arc/FT110100306
Appears in Collections:Earth and Environmental Sciences publications

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
hdl_98082.pdfPublished version2.23 MBAdobe PDFView/Open


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