How Should Journal Quality be Ranked? An Application to Agricultural, Energy, Environmental and Resource Economics

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorChang, C-L.
dc.contributor.authorMcAleer, M.
dc.date.accessioned2012-04-04T21:42:35Z
dc.date.available2012-04-04T21:42:35Z
dc.date.issued2011en
dc.descriptionRePEc Working Paper Series 43/2011en
dc.description.abstractThe Thomson Reuters ISI Web of Science citations database (hereafter ISI) category of Economics has one of the largest numbers of journals, at 304, of any ISI discipline, and hence has wide coverage. The paper analyses the leading international journals in the Economics sub-disciplines of Energy, Environmental and Resource Economics using quantifiable Research Assessment Measures (RAMs), and highlights the similarities and differences in alternative RAMs. The RAMs are based on alternative transformations of citations taken from the ISI database. Alternative RAMs may be calculated annually or updated daily to answer the perennial questions as to When, Where and How (frequently) published papers are cited (see Chang et al. (2011a, b, c)). The RAMs include the most widely used RAM, namely the classic 2-year impact factor including journal self citations (2YIF), 2-year impact factor excluding journal self citations (2YIF*), 5-year impact factor including journal self citations (5YIF), Immediacy (or zero-year impact factor (0YIF)), Eigenfactor, Article Influence, C3PO (Citation Performance Per Paper Online), h-index, PI-BETA (Papers Ignored - By Even The Authors), 2-year Self-citation Threshold Approval Ratings (2Y-STAR), Historical Self-citation Threshold Approval Ratings (H-STAR), Impact Factor Inflation (IFI), and Cited Article Influence (CAI). As data are not available for 5YIF, Article Influence and CAI for one of the 20 journals considered, 13 RAMs are analysed for 19 highly-cited journals in Energy, Environmental and Resource Economics in the ISI category of Economics. Harmonic mean rankings of the 13 RAMs for the 19 highly-cited journals are also presented. It is shown that emphasizing the 2-year impact factor of a journal, which partly answers the question as to When published papers are cited, to the exclusion of other informative RAMs, which answer Where and How (frequently) published papers are cited, can lead to a distorted evaluation of journal impact and influence relative to the Harmonic Mean rankings.en
dc.identifier.citationChang, C-L., McAleer, M. (2011) How Should Journal Quality be Ranked? An Application to Agricultural, Energy, Environmental and Resource Economics. Department of Economics and Finance. 22pp..en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10092/6502
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherCollege of Business and Economicsen
dc.publisherUniversity of Canterbury. Department of Economics and Financeen
dc.relation.urihttp://www.econ.canterbury.ac.nz/RePEc/cbt/econwp/1143.pdfen
dc.rights.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10092/17651en
dc.subjectresearch assessment measuresen
dc.subjectimpact factoren
dc.subjectIFIen
dc.subjectC3POen
dc.subjectPI-BETAen
dc.subjectSTARen
dc.subjecteigenfactoren
dc.subjectarticle influenceen
dc.subjecth-indexen
dc.subject.anzsrcField of Research::14 - Economicsen
dc.subject.anzsrcFields of Research::36 - Creative arts and writing::3602 - Creative and professional writing::360203 - Professional writing and journalism practiceen
dc.titleHow Should Journal Quality be Ranked? An Application to Agricultural, Energy, Environmental and Resource Economicsen
dc.typeDiscussion / Working Papers
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
12638493_McAleer.pdf
Size:
272.38 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download
Collections
Business: Working Papers
Working Papers in Economics