Cited by 34scientometrics and bibliometrics researchPsychology Research and BibliometricsWeb visibility and informetrics

Bibliometric Analysis of Psychotherapy Research: Performance Assessment and Position in the Journal Landscape

van Raan, Anthony F. J., Visser, Martijn S., Van Leeuwen, Thed N., van Wijk, Erik·2003·Psychotherapy Research

Abstract

The authors provide an overview of advanced bibliometric methods for (a) an objective and transparent assessment of journal performance and (b) positioning of a journal in relation to other journals. These methods are applied to Psychotherapy Research, an international journal within the field of clinical psychology. In the first analysis, the authors focus on journal performance in an international comparative perspective (i.e., the performance of the journal in relation to all other journals in the same field of science) and introduce a novel type of journal impact factor. In the second analysis, the authors position the journal on the basis of total citation relations among all relevant journals, including those outside the specific field of science to which the journal belongs. A multitude of interdisciplinary relations between the journal under investigation and many other journals is revealed. The investigators discuss briefly the potential of such a "journal citation mapping" for unraveling interdisciplinary developments and "interfaces" between different fields of science.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/ptr/kpg038

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Glänzel, W. (1992). Publication dynamics and citation impact: A multi-dimensional approach to scientometric research evaluation. In P. Weingart, R. Sehringer, & M. Winterhager (Eds.), Representations of science and technology (pp. 209-224). Leiden, the Netherlands: DSWO Press.
  2. Tijssen, R. J. W. (1992). Cartography of science: Scientometric mapping with multidimensional scaling methods. Leiden, the Netherlands: DSWO Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
van Raan, A. F. J., Visser, M. S., Van Leeuwen, T. N., & van Wijk, E.
Venue
Psychotherapy Research
Published
2003-10-01
Volume
13
Issue
4
Pages
511-528
ISSN
  • 1050-3307 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-4381
OpenAlex
W2114431544
Cited by
34
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
2.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychotherapy Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychology Research and Bibliometrics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Web visibility and informetrics
Keywords
journal impact factor, interdisciplinary connections, journal positioning, bibliometric methods

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