The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Differences in impact factor across fields and over time
Open accessAbstract
The bibliometric measure impact factor is a leading indicator of journal influence, and impact factors are routinely used in making decisions ranging from selecting journal subscriptions to allocating research funding to deciding tenure cases. Yet journal impact factors have increased gradually over time, and moreover impact factors vary widely across academic disciplines. Here we quantify inflation over time and differences across fields in impact factor scores and determine the sources of these differences. We find that the average number of citations in reference lists has increased gradually, and this is the predominant factor responsible for the inflation of impact factor scores over time. Field‐specific variation in the fraction of citations to literature indexed by Thomson Scientific's Journal Citation Reports is the single greatest contributor to differences among the impact factors of journals in different fields. The growth rate of the scientific literature as a whole, and cross‐field differences in net size and growth rate of individual fields, have had very little influence on impact factor inflation or on cross‐field differences in impact factor.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“In agreement with the findings of Ref. [11] c 0 shows very little correlation with the overall size of the field, as measured by the total number of articles.”
From Universality of citation distributions: Toward an objective measure of scientific impact (2008) · cites this paper as [11]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Maps of random walks on complex networks reveal community structure
Rosvall, M., & Bergstrom, C. T. (2008) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0706851105 · Cited by 4,583
Self-citationGarfield, E. (1972) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.178.4060.471 · Cited by 2,788
The History and Meaning of the Journal Impact Factor
Garfield, E. (2006) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.295.1.90 · Cited by 2,770
Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research
Seglen, P. O. (1997) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.314.7079.497 · Cited by 2,447
Chevan, A., & Sutherland, M. (1991) · The American Statistician · doi:10.1080/00031305.1991.10475776 · Cited by 1,181
Chevan, A., & Sutherland, M. (1991) · The American Statistician · doi:10.2307/2684366 · Cited by 446
Research Papers: Who's Uncited Now?
Hamilton, D. P. (1991) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1986409 · Cited by 223
Moed, H. F., Burger, W. J. M., Frankfort, J. G., & van Raan, A. F. J. (1985) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/bf02016935 · Cited by 124
Bias in the journal impact factor
Vanclay, J. K. (2008) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-008-1778-4 · Cited by 77
Average and global impact of a set of journals
Egghe, L., & Rousseau, R. (1996) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/bf02126648 · Cited by 41
Bibliometric features of some scientific subfields and the scientometric consequences therefrom
Vinkler, P. (1988) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/bf02017102 · Cited by 32
Obsolescence or immediacy? Evidence supporting Price's hypothesis
Márton, J. (1985) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/bf02017142 · Cited by 26
Journal Impact Factors Are Inflated
Wilson, A. E. (2007) · BioScience · doi:10.1641/b570702 · Cited by 22
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- 2006, Journal Citation Reports
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Bibliometric Indicators: Quality Measurements of Scientific Publication
Durieux, V., & Gevenois, P. A. (2010) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.09090626 · Cited by 915
Universality of citation distributions: Toward an objective measure of scientific impact
Radicchi, F., Fortunato, S., & Castellano, C. (2008) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0806977105 · Cited by 828
Jun, S., Yoo, H. S., & Choi, S. (2017) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2017.11.009 · Cited by 587
The preeminence of ethnic diversity in scientific collaboration
AlShebli, B., Rahwan, T., & Woon, W. L. (2018) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-018-07634-8 · Cited by 505
Using publication metrics to highlight academic productivity and research impact
Carpenter, C. R., Cone, D. C., & Sarli, C. C. (2014) · Academic Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1111/acem.12482 · Cited by 377
Metadata
- Authors
- Althouse, B. M., West, J. D., Bergstrom, C. T., & Bergstrom, T.
- Affiliations
- University of Washington (US)
- Venue
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2008-12-12
- Volume
- 60
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 27-34
- ISSN
- 1532-2882 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-2890
- OpenAlex
- W1859177121
- Cited by
- 270
- References
- 12
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 15
- FWCI
- 18.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Web visibility and informetrics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychology Research and Bibliometrics
- Keywords
- journal impact factor, disciplinary differences, citation practices, Journal Citation Reports, bibliometric indicators, scientific literature growth, journal influence
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
