In this paper, we examine the evolution of the impact of non-elite journals. We attempt to answer two questions. First, what fraction of the top-cited articles are published in non-elite journals and how has this changed over time. Second, what fraction of the total citations are to non-elite journals and how has this changed over time. We studied citations to articles published in 1995-2013. We computed the 10 most-cited journals and the 1000 most-cited articles each year for all 261 subject categories in Scholar Metrics. We marked the 10 most-cited journals in a category as the elite journals for the category and the rest as non-elite. There are two conclusions from our study. First, the fraction of top-cited articles published in non-elite journals increased steadily over 1995-2013. While the elite journals still publish a substantial fraction of high-impact articles, many more authors of well-regarded papers in diverse research fields are choosing other venues. The number of top-1000 papers published in non-elite journals for the representative subject category went from 149 in 1995 to 245 in 2013, a growth of 64 . Looking at broad research areas, 4 out of 9 areas saw at least one-third of the top-cited articles published in non-elite journals in 2013. For 6 out of 9 areas, the fraction of top-cited papers published in non-elite journals for the representative subject category grew by 45 or more. Second, now that finding and reading relevant articles in non-elite journals is about as easy as finding and reading articles in elite journals, researchers are increasingly building on and citing work published everywhere. Considering citations to all articles, the percentage of citations to articles in non-elite journals went from 27 in 1995 to 47 in 2013. Six out of nine broad areas had at least 50 of citations going to articles published in non-elite journals in 2013.
In a follow-up study @cite_4 , they took a closer look at 13 journals, seven traditionally top-ranked journals and six upcoming journals. They found that since around 1990, the fraction of most-cited papers published in the traditionally top-ranked journals has been dropping and the fraction of such papers published in the upcoming journals has been increasing.
@cite_4
2134548949
Previous research indicates that during the past 20 years, the highest-quality work has been published in an increasingly diverse and larger group of journals. In this article, we examine whether this diversification has also affected the handful of elite journals that are traditionally considered to be the best. We examine citation patterns during the past 40 years of seven long-standing traditionally elite journals and six journals that have been increasing in importance during the past 20 years. To be among the top 5 or 1 cited papers, papers now need about twice as many citations as they did 40 years ago. Since the late 1980s and early 1990s, elite journals have been publishing a decreasing proportion of these top-cited papers. This also applies to the two journals that are typically considered as the top venues and often used as bibliometric indicators of "excellence": Science and Nature. On the other hand, several new and established journals are publishing an increasing proportion of the most-cited papers. These changes bring new challenges and opportunities for all parties. Journals can enact policies to increase or maintain their relative position in the journal hierarchy. Researchers now have the option to publish in more diverse venues knowing that their work can still reach the same audiences. Finally, evaluators and administrators need to know that although there will always be a certain prestige associated with publishing in "elite" journals, journal hierarchies are in constant flux. Historically, papers have been physically bound to the journal in which they were published; but in the digital age papers are available individually, no longer tied to their respective journals. Hence, papers now can be read and cited based on their own merits, independently of the journal's physical availability, reputation, or impact factor (IF). We compare the strength of the relationship between journals' IFs and the actual citations received by their respective papers from 1902 to 2009. Throughout most of the 20th century, papers' citation rates were increasingly linked to their respective journals' IFs. However, since 1990, the advent of the digital age, the relation between IFs and paper citations has been weakening. This began first in physics, a field that was quick to make the transition into the electronic domain. Furthermore, since 1990 the overall proportion of highly cited papers coming from highly cited journals has been decreasing and, of these highly cited papers, the proportion not coming from highly cited journals has been increasing. Should this pattern continue, it might bring an end to the use of the IF as a way to evaluate the quality of journals, papers, and researchers. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to suggest an alternative to the widely used Times Cited criterion for analysing citation networks. The approach involves taking account of the natures of the papers that cite a given paper, so as to differentiate between papers that attract the same number of citations.Design methodology approach – ArticleRank is an algorithm that has been derived from Google's PageRank algorithm to measure the influence of journal articles. ArticleRank is applied to two datasets – a citation network based on an early paper on webometrics, and a self‐citation network based on the 19 most cited papers in the Journal of Documentation – using citation data taken from the Web of Knowledge database.Findings – ArticleRank values provide a different ranking of a set of papers from that provided by the corresponding Times Cited values, and overcomes the inability of the latter to differentiate between papers with the same numbers of citations. The difference in rankings between Times Cited ... Scholars are increasingly citing electronic “web references” which are not preserved in libraries or full text archives. WebCite is a new standard for citing web references. To “webcite” a document involves archiving the cited Web page through www.webcitation.org and citing the WebCite permalink instead of (or in addition to) the unstable live Web page. This journal has amended its “instructions for authors” accordingly, asking authors to archive cited Web pages before submitting a manuscript. Almost 200 other journals are already using the system. We discuss the rationale for WebCite, its technology, and how scholars, editors, and publishers can benefit from the service. Citing scholars initiate an archiving process of all cited Web references, ideally before they submit a manuscript. Authors of online documents and websites which are expected to be cited by others can ensure that their work is permanently available by creating an archived copy using WebCite and providing the citation information including the WebCite link on their Web document(s). Editors should ask their authors to cache all cited Web addresses (Uniform Resource Locators, or URLs) “prospectively” before submitting their manuscripts to their journal. Editors and publishers should also instruct their copyeditors to cache cited Web material if the author has not done so already. Finally, WebCite can process publisher submitted “citing articles” (submitted for example as eXtensible Markup Language [XML] documents) to automatically archive all cited Web pages shortly before or on publication. Finally, WebCite can act as a focussed crawler, caching retrospectively references of already published articles. Copyright issues are addressed by honouring respective Internet standards (robot exclusion files, no-cache and no-archive tags). Long-term preservation is ensured by agreements with libraries and digital preservation organizations. The resulting WebCite Index may also have applications for research assessment exercises, being able to measure the impact of Web services and published Web documents through access and Web citation metrics. @PARASPLIT [J Med Internet Res 2005;7(5):e60] Chen's data for the raw frequency of use of 138 physics journals in the science library at M I T are re‐examined and converted to densities of use‐per‐metre of shelf. Other units of size for obtaining densities, and their measurement, are discussed. There is no evidence for synchronous obsolescence in the 1955 to 1968 volumes of these journals: instead there is some statistically significant evidence of greater density of use with greater age. Similar evidence elsewhere is cited. The ranking order for heaviness of use is also radically altered by converting raw frequencies to densities of use. It is suggested that, for comparing the relative values of different journals, or age groups, in library use or citation studies, analyses of raw frequencies are valueless, and indeed potentially dangerously misleading, until they are converted to allow for the numbers of available items in each group examined. Online journals promise to serve more information to more dispersed audiences and are more efficiently searched and recalled. But because they are used differently than print—scientists and scholars tend to search electronically and follow hyperlinks rather than browse or peruse—electronically available journals may portend an ironic change for science. Using a database of 34 million articles, their citations (1945 to 2005), and online availability (1998 to 2005), I show that as more journal issues came online, the articles referenced tended to be more recent, fewer journals and articles were cited, and more of those citations were to fewer journals and articles. The forced browsing of print archives may have stretched scientists and scholars to anchor findings deeply into past and present scholarship. Searching online is more efficient and following hyperlinks quickly puts researchers in touch with prevailing opinion, but this may accelerate consensus and narrow the range of findings and ideas built upon. First published in the Journal of Enterprise Architecture, Vol. 2, No. 4, 2006 pp. 29-40. Republished with the kind permission of the Journal of Enterprise Architecture Link analysis typically focuses on a single type of connection, e.g., two journal papers are linked because they are written by the same author. However, often we want to analyze data that has multiple linkages between objects, e.g., two papers may have the same keywords and one may cite the other. The goal of this paper is to show that multilinear algebra provides a tool for multilink analysis. We analyze five years of publication data from journals published by the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics. We explore how papers can be grouped in the context of multiple link types using a tensor to represent all the links between them. A PARAFAC decomposition on the resulting tensor yields information similar to the SVD decomposition of a standard adjacency matrix. We show how the PARAFAC decomposition can be used to understand the structure of the document space and define paper-paper similarities based on multiple linkages. Examples are presented where the decomposed tensor data is used to find papers similar to a body of work (e.g., related by topic or similar to a particular author's papers), find related authors using linkages other than explicit co-authorship or citations, distinguish between papers written bymore » different authors with the same name, and predict the journal in which a paper was published.« less Abstract We review the past 25 years of research into time series forecasting. In this silver jubilee issue, we naturally highlight results published in journals managed by the International Institute of Forecasters ( Journal of Forecasting 1982–1985 and International Journal of Forecasting 1985–2005). During this period, over one third of all papers published in these journals concerned time series forecasting. We also review highly influential works on time series forecasting that have been published elsewhere during this period. Enormous progress has been made in many areas, but we find that there are a large number of topics in need of further development. We conclude with comments on possible future research directions in this field. Design science research is a research paradigm focusing on problem-solving. It is increasingly accepted and adopted by Information Systems (IS) researchers as a legitimate research paradigm because of its capability in balancing research relevance and rigor. In the last fifteen years, many design science research has been published in top IS journals and has received a lot of attentions from IS researchers. However, current confusion and misunderstandings of DSR’s central ideas (e.g., definition, philosophical foundation, research outcomes, etc.) are obstructing it from having a more striking influence on the IS field. The purpose of this paper is to present a comprehensive and critical review of existing DSR literature. In total, 119 papers, published in top IS journals and conference proceedings, were included in the review. The results of this study portray a big picture of current DSR in IS field and build a comprehensive theoretical knowledge base in terms of DSR-related issues. This study also identifies many research issues which can be examined by future DSR. This article challenges recent research (Evans, 2008) reporting that the concentration of cited scientific literature increases with the online availability of articles and journals. Using Thomson Reuters' Web of Science, the present article analyses changes in the concentration of citations received (2- and 5-year citation windows) by papers published between 1900 and 2005. Three measures of concentration are used: the percentage of papers that received at least one citation (cited papers); the percentage of papers needed to account for 20 , 50 , and 80 of the citations; and the Herfindahl-Hirschman index (HHI). These measures are used for four broad disciplines: natural sciences and engineering, medical fields, social sciences, and the humanities. All these measures converge and show that, contrary to what was reported by Evans, the dispersion of citations is actually increasing. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyze author and methodological characteristics in top-tier publications in higher education. As the importance of research in the professoriate continues to grow and faculty face ratcheted-up expectations for prestige in their research, such data are important contextually and historically. Design methodology approach This descriptive study examines 587 articles within four top-tier higher education research journals from 2008 to 2012. Data were open coded and analyzed with a research team, resulting in an intercoder reliability of 0.96. Findings Results show most authors are assistant professors, overwhelmingly received PhD’s from very high research institutions (Carnegie classification), and currently work in similar institutions. Five degree-granting institutions accounted for 29.0 percent of publications in top-tier journals. Additionally, quantitative research accounted for 60.6 percent of published articles, with regression as the most commonly used analytic technique (34.7 percent). Research limitations implications This study examined only higher education faculty and institutions based in the USA as well as first authors. Practical implications These results are meant to provide baseline data for top-tier journals within higher education and might inform conversations about methodological acceptability, respectability of qualitative research, graduate education research requirements, journal editor trainings, and tenure and promotion criteria. Originality value This paper provides an update to previous studies that examined publications in higher education within the last three decades. In addition, this study examines author characteristics, which previous studies have mostly excluded. This study offers empirical data to inform conversations about the state of research in top-tier publications within higher education. Videre: Journal of Computer Vision Research (ISSN 1089-2788) is a quarterly journal published electronically on the Internet by The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 02142. Subscriptions and address changes should be addressed to MIT Press Journals, Five Cambridge Center, Cambridge, MA 02142; phone: (617) 253-2889; fax: (617) 577-1545; e-mail: journals-orders@mit.edu. Subscription rates are: Individuals @math 125.00. Canadians add additional 7 GST. Prices subject to change without notice. LOCKSS (Lots Of Copies Keep Stuff Safe) is a tool designed for libraries to use to ensure their community's continued access to web-published scientific journals. LOCKSS allows libraries to take custody of the material to which they subscribe, in the same way they do for paper, and to preserve it. By preserving it they ensure that, for their community, links and searches continue to resolve to the published material even if it is no longer available from the publisher. Think of it as the digital equivalent of stacks where an authoritative copy of material is always available rather than the digital equivalent of an archive. LOCKSS allows libraries to run web caches for specific journals. These caches collect content as it is published and are never flushed. They cooperate in a peer-to-peer network to detect and repair damaged or missing pages. The caches run on generic PC hardware using open-source software and require almost no skilled administration, making the cost of preserving a journal manageable. Given a lion and a man, their initial positions, and restrictions on their ranges and speeds, how quickly can the lion get within a given distance from the man? We consider the case in which the lion and man are restricted to the interior of a circle and each is limited to the same speed. INFORMS Journal on Computing , ISSN 1091-9856, was published as ORSA Journal on Computing from 1989 to 1995 under ISSN 0899-1499. Background Participation of women in the medical profession has increased during the past four decades, but issues of concern persist regarding disparities between the sexes in academic medicine. Advancement is largely driven by peer-reviewed original research, so we sought to determine the representation of female physician-investigators among the authors of selected publications during the past 35 years. Methods Original articles from six prominent medical journals — the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), the Annals of Internal Medicine (Ann Intern Med), the Annals of Surgery (Ann Surg), Obstetrics & Gynecology (Obstet Gynecol), and the Journal of Pediatrics (J Pediatr) — were categorized according to the sex of both the first and the senior (last listed) author. Sex was also determined for the authors of guest editorials in NEJM and JAMA. Data were collected for the years 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000, and 2004. The analysis was restricted to author... Ranking has been applied in many domains using recommendation systems such as search engine, e-commerce, and so on. We will introduce and study N-linear mutual ranking, which can rank n classes of objects at once. The ranking scores of these classes are dependent to the others. For instance, PageRank by Google is a 2-linear mutual ranking, which ranks the webpages and links at once. Particularly, we focus to N-star ranking model and demonstrate it in ranking conference and journal problems. We have conducted the experiments for the models in which the citations are not considered. The experimental results are based on the DBLP dataset, which contains more than one million papers, authors and thousands of conferences and journals in computer science. Finally, N-star ranking is a very strong ranking algorithm can be applied in many real-world problems. Traditional journals, even those available electronically, are changing slowly. However, there is rapid evolution in scholarly communication. Usage is moving to electronic formats. In some areas, it appears that electronic versions of papers are being read about as often as the printed journal versions. Although there are serious difficulties in comparing figures from different media, the growth rates in usage of electronic scholarly information are sufficiently high that if they continue for a few years, there will be no doubt that print versions will be eclipsed. Further, much of the electronic information that is accessed is outside the formal scholarly publication process. There is also vigorous growth in forms of electronic communication that take advantage of the unique capabilities of the web, and which simply do not fit into the traditional journal publishing format. This paper presents some statistics on usage of print and electronic information. It also discusses some preliminary evidence about the changing patterns of usage. It appears that much of the online usage comes from new readers (esoteric research papers assigned in undergraduate classes, for example) and often from places that do not have access to print journals. Also, the reactions to even slight barriers to usage suggest that even high-quality scholarly papers are not irreplaceable. Readers are faced with a ‘river of knowledge’ that allows them to select among a multitude of sources, and to find near substitutes when necessary. To stay relevant, scholars, publishers and librarians will have to make even greater efforts to make their material easily accessible. Science has traditionally been mapped on the basis of authorship and citation data. Due to publication and citation delays such data represents the structure of science as it existed in the past. We propose to map science by proxy of journal relationships derived from usage data to determine research trends as they presently occur. This mapping is performed by applying a principal components analysis superimposed with a k-means cluster analysis on networks of journal relationships derived from a large set of article usage data collected for the Los Alamos National Laboratory research community. Results indicate that meaningful maps of the interests of a local scientific community can be derived from usage data. Subject groupings in the mappings corresponds to Thomson ISI subject categories. A comparison to maps resulting from the analysis of 2003 Thomson ISI Journal Citation Report data reveals interesting differences between the features of local usage and global citation data. Although food journaling is understood to be both important and difficult, little work has empirically documented the specific challenges people experience with food journals. We identify key challenges in a qualitative study combining a survey of 141 current and lapsed food journalers with analysis of 5,526 posts in community forums for three mobile food journals. Analyzing themes in this data, we find and discuss barriers to reliable food entry, negative nudges caused by current techniques, and challenges with social features. Our results motivate research exploring a wider range of approaches to food journal design and technology.