A comparative Evaluation of the Impact Factor Indicators Function of IF, IPP, SJR, SNIP in Introducing valid journals in social sciences, engineering, engineering and medicine fields

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Associate Professor, Faculty of Humanities, Islamic Azad University, Yadegar-e Emam, Shahr-e Rey Branch, Iran

2 M.Sc in Knowledge and Information Science, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran,Iran

3 Assistant Professor of Knowledge and Information Science, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Purpose: The main purpose of this study is to determine the difference between the IF and the indicators of SJR, SNIP, and IPP in introducing scientific journals in scientific fields.
Methodology: This research is an applied research and in terms of implementation method, it is a scientometrics study (comparative type). The population is the top scientific journals, which are in the first quarter of the list of JCR magazines, and includes 1093 titles in medical, technical, engineering, and social science fields. The required data were collected through the online search at JCR, Scopus and SCImago. The statistical tests of Kolmogorov Smirnov were used for data normalization and exploratory factor analysis to test the hypotheses.
Findings: Findings showed that the mean difference between two indicators of "IF" and "SJR" was significant in the fields of engineering and social sciences, and the mean difference between these two indices was not significant in the field of medicine. In each of the three fields, the mean difference between the two "IF" and "SNIP" indicators is significant. In the medical and social sciences, the mean difference between the two "IF" and "IPP" indicators was significant and not significant in the field of engineering. In the social sciences, the indicators of the "SJR", "SNIP" and "IPP" are highly correlated and the "IF" has no high correlation with other indicators. In the field of engineering and medical sciences, the "IF", "SNIP" and "IPP" indicators are highly correlated and the "SJR" index has no high correlation with other indicators.
Conclusion: The result showed that the use of different indicators in different subjects has given different results, and a more accurate index should be selected in each field according to the degree of closeness and the difference between these differences. The indicators of SJR, SNIP, and IPP in the social sciences, and the indicators of IF, SNIP and IPP, respectively, in the field of engineering and medical sciences, are the most relevant indicators for citation and decision making, because of the most similarity in the ranking of journals in these fields. The use of the IF in the field of social sciences and the SJR in the fields of engineering and medical sciences due to lack of correlation with other indicators do not seem appropriate and in general, the use of the two indicators of IPP and SNIP in all thematic areas are better and more reliable indicators

Keywords

References

امانی، مجتبی؛ بابااحمدی، ابوذر (1384). ناکارآمدی عامل تأثیرگذار (IF) در ارزیابی مقالات و یافته‌های علمی. رهیافت. 36، 70-76.
جمالی، جمشید؛ دهقانی، محسن؛ افضل آقایی، منور (1393). بررسی کیفیت مجلات حوزه زنان و مامایی در پایگاه ISI و Scopus بر اساس شاخص‌های رتبه‌بندی مجلات. زنان، مامایی و نازایی. 17(108)، 9-20.
خواجه‌لو، مسعود‌عیسی؛ زارع‌گارگانی، وحیده (1392). مروری کوتاه بر ضریب تأثیر مجلات؛ اهمیت و عیوب. تصویر سلات، 4 (2): 43-46
دیاری، ساره (1393). مقایسه تطبیقی استناد و دگرسنجه‌ها نشریات برتر پزشکی (پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد). وزارت علوم، تحقیقات و فناوری- دانشگاه شهید باهنر کرمان، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی.
زارعی، عیسی؛ صدیقی، زینب (1396). بررسی تطبیقی سازمان‌های سنجش علم بر اساس شاخص‌های علم‌سنجی. پژوهشنامه علم‌سنجی. دوره 3، شماره 5، بهار و تابستان 1396، 49-66
سلاجقه، مژده؛ دیاری، ساره (1395). رابطه بین دگرسنجه‌ها و شاخص‌های استنادی اسنیپ، رتبه‌بندی نشریات سایماگو، ایگن فاکتور، و ضریب تأثیر نشریات پزشکی. مطالعات ملی کتابداری و سازمان‌دهی اطلاعات. 27(2) 106.
صمدی، لاله (۱۳۹۰). تأملی در کاربرد ضریب تأثیر برای ارزیابی کیفیت نشریات. علوم و فناوری اطلاعات، ویژه علم‌سنجی، ۴۹-۶۶.
معتمدی، فاطمه؛ رمضانی پاکپور لنگرودی، فاطمه (1394). بررسی تطبیقی IF و SJR مجلات کتابداری و اطلاع‌رسانی. مجله علم‌سنجی کاسپین. 3، 50-56.
ناب، میکائیل؛ ماپور، امین. (1380). عامل تأثیر (Impact Factor) منافع و مضار؟. فصلنامه علوم، تحقیقات و فناوری. 3(7)، 27-30.
نوروزی چاکلی، عبدالرضا؛ قضاوی، رقیه؛ نورمحمدی، حمزه‌علی (1394). نرمال‌سازی، ارزش‌گذاری و اعتبارسنجی شاخص‌های ارزیابی عملکرد پژوهشی در علوم پزشکی نسبت به سایر حوزه‌های علمی. مدیریت اطلاعات سلامت. 12(4)، 445-456.
Hadavi, Peter; Hasan, saeed-UI; Asghar, Awais; Amin, Sarah (2016). A comprehensive examination of the relation of three citation-based journal metrics to expert judgment of journal quality. Journal of informetrics. 10(2016), 162-173.
Jacso, P (2001). A deficit in the algorithm for calculating the impact factor of Scholarly journals: the journals impact factor. Department of information and computer sciences, university of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu. 590-594.
Journals metrics. (2016). Retrieved from www.journalmetrics.com
Kianifar, H; Sadeghi, R & Zarifmahmoudi L. (2014). Comparison between Impact Factor, Eigenfactor Metrics, and SCimago Journal Rank Indicator of Pediatric Neurology Journals. Acta Inform Med.; 22(2):103-6
Miguel Angel, Sicilia; Sanchez Alonso, Salvado; Garcia Barriocanal, Elena (2011). Comparing impact factors from two different citation databases: Te case of computer sciences. Journal of informetrics. 5, 698-704.
Mingers, John; Yang, Liying (2017). Evaluating Quality: A review of journal citation indicators and ranking in business and management. European journal of operational research. 257(1), 323-337.
Moed, H. F. (2010). The Source-Normalized Impact per Paper ( SNIP ) is a valid and sophisticated indicator of journal citation impact, (January), 1–4.
Oosthuizen, JC & Fenton, JE (2014) Alternatives to the impact factor. Surgeon. 12(5):239-43. doi: 10.1016
Salvador-Olivan, J.A & Agustin-Lacruz (2015). Correlation between bibliometric indicators in Web of Science y Scopus journals. Revista General de Información y Documentación. 25 (2): 341-359
Siebelt M, Siebelt T, Pilot P, Bloem RM, Bhandari M, Poolman RW. (2010). Citation analysis of orthopaedic literature; 18 major orthopaedic journals compared for Impact Factor and SCImago. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 4;11:4. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-11-4
Waltman, L (2015). A review of the literature on citation impact indicators. Journal of Informetrics. 10 (2) P 365-391; available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2016.02.007
Zarifmahmoudi, L.; Jamali, J. & Sadeghi, R. (2015). Google Scholar journal metrics: Comparison with impact factor and SCImago journal rank indicator for nuclear medicine journals. Iranian Journal of Nuclear Medicine. 23 (1):  8-14.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics