- Abs Journal Ranking
- “a Study on Employees Strain Causes With Special Reference to Titan Industries Limited, Hosur”.
- mapping chemical science research.pdf
- RM unit 1
- ELS LC Metrics Poster June 23 2016
- mkg-ipr-part5
- Penetrating the Omerta of Predatory Publishing
- srmuniv.ac - Academia - Academic Web Services.pdf
- 01 - On the Craft of Effective Reading
- Mikolas l 2017
- Measuring Scholarly Impact of Journals
- cacmapr05
- Being a Scientits Today
- New Europe College Yearbook_2011-2012
- Sem Charts Single
- Summary of Research Finding
- Pres2 History of Extension
- glpo cheat sheet
- Session 06 Bp
- Internship Annotated Bibliography
- PGCE Primary and Early Years Pre Course Reading 2013 (1)
- portfolio reflection 3 3
- FORMAT.THESIS.docx
- Rigor and Relevance
- brm final
- EPS2013278S&E
- Buying Behaviour Fairness Creams Project
- Refined Done My Introduction Paper
- Title Page
- Dissertation
- Barbital Um
- Analisis Asam Amino
- indonesia
- Anklin Laporan p1 Gol 1 2 Maret 2010

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Informetrics

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/joi

Short Communication

**Citation impact analysis of top ranked computer science journals and their rankings
**

Chih-Fong Tsai ∗

Department of Information Management, National Central University, Taiwan

a r t i c l e

i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Citation based approaches, such as the impact factor and h-index, have been used to measure the inﬂuence or impact of journals for journal rankings. A survey of the related literature for different disciplines shows that the level of correlation between these citation based approaches is domain dependent. We analyze the correlation between the impact factors and h-indices of the top ranked computer science journals for ﬁve different subjects. Our results show that the correlation between these citation based approaches is very low. Since using a different approach can result in different journal rankings, we further combine the different results and then re-rank the journals using a combination method. These new ranking results can be used as a reference for researchers to choose their publication outlets. © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Article history: Received 20 November 2013 Received in revised form 18 December 2013 Accepted 9 January 2014 Keywords: Journal ranking Impact factor h-Index Correlation coefﬁcient Computer science

1. Introduction Journal publication is very important and is the major activity for scientists and researchers. In addition, it can be regarded as a required criterion for evaluating the research performance of a scientist. Consequently, journal rankings are usually a major indicator for researchers to choose suitable publication outlets. There are several possible approaches to ranking journals, which can be classiﬁed into qualitative and quantitative based methods. The qualitative type of method is usually based on surveys which record the perceptions of respondents, such as described by Mylonopoulos and Theoharakis (2001) and Peffers and Tang (2003). On the other hand, the quantitative type of method is simply based on the journal’s impact factor, which is a metric to measure the inﬂuence or impact of journals in various subject areas. In particular, the impact factor of a journal is calculated by the average number of citations to recent articles published in that journal (Garﬁeld, 2006). This kind of citation analysis is considered the most objective methodology for assessing journal quality and ranking (Katerattanakul, Han, & Hong, 2003). The Web of Knowledge is an academic citation indexing and search service that covers the sciences, social sciences, arts and humanities for the purpose of impact factor references. Additionally, the h-index has been recently proposed to measure both the productivity and impact of the published work of a scientist or scholar (Hirsch, 2005). It is based on a set of the scientist’s most often cited papers and the number of citations that they have received in other publications. Similarly, it can be used to assess the journal’s quality and impact (Harzing & van der Wal, 2009; Mingers, Macri, & Petrovici, 2012). Vanclay (2008) showed there to be a high correlation between the h-index and impact factor, after ranking 180 forestry journals by the h-index. Similarly, Hodge and Lacasse (2011), Hunt, Cleary, and Walter (2010), and Han Yu, and Wang (2010)

∗ Tel.: +886 3 422 7151; fax: +886 3 4254604. E-mail address: cftsai@mgt.ncu.edu.tw 1751-1577/$ – see front matter © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2014.01.002

Tsai / Journal of Informetrics 8 (2014) 318–328 319 found that there to be a strong positive relationship between the journal impact factor and h-index in the domains of social work. to calculate the h-indices of 2009. the top 20 journals are considered. a linear transformation method for score normalization (Lee. However. since the two quantitative (citation) based methods could result in two different ranking results for each speciﬁc subject. hardware & architecture. and 2011. and 2011 respectively. Section 2 describes the methodology and data used.com/pop. In other words. and 2011 respectively. interdisciplinary applications. which has been widely used in multiple evidence combinations for information retrieval (Nuray & Can. The aim of this paper is to use the quantitative based methods including impact factor and h-index for correlation coefﬁcient analysis between various top ranked computer science journals on different subjects. and theory & methods. 2009. the 5-year impact factor for 2009 of a journal is the average impact factor from 2005 to 2009. In addition. Work Bador and Lafouge (2010) Han et al. interdisciplinary applications. they are based on the articles published in 2009. In addition. we only consider ﬁve subjects. In particular. On the other hand. such as cybernetics with 20 and hardware & architecture with 50. 2000–2005 2006 2009 (1) 2009. software engineering. For example. and reproductive biology. 2010). psychiatry Biology Social work Psychiatric Forestry Artiﬁcial intelligence Computer science (ﬁve different categories) . That is. and theory & methods. information systems. each journal contains three impact factors and three 5-year impact factors for 2009. the correlation between the impact factor ad h-index is not strong for the artiﬁcial intelligence journals. CombSUM uses the following formula to calculate the score of journal j over n systems: n Sum score (j) = j=1 sj (1) Particularly. (2010) Vanclay (2008) Zhang (2012) Our method Impact factor 2006 2008. there are 111 journals on the subject of artiﬁcial intelligence. 2010. information systems. Finally. 2010. 2006). Table 1 shows the comparative result including our method. and 2011 are also examined in order to analyze the correlation between the impact factor and h-index of each journal. which are artiﬁcial intelligence. The CombSUM combination method is applied as the score based method for combining different journal rankings. with 22. That is. 2010.-F.C.htm#download (calculation date: between 2013/5/1 and 2013/5/7) is used to calculate the h-index of each journal (Harzing. 2010). With this method the score of each journal is the fused result of the sum of the scores obtained from individual ranking results. each journal must be mapped to a value s (score) that is normalized throughout all ranking methods. 2005–2009 (2) 2010. 2010. 2010. with some journals with a modest or low impact factor having a high h-index (Zhang.harzing. some studies suggest that the impact factor and h-index are completely complementary when evaluating journals of the same scientiﬁc discipline (Bador & Lafouge. Therefore. 2006–2010 (3) 2011. cybernetics. in Section 4 some conclusions are offered. It should be noted that in literature the correlation coefﬁcient analysis between journals’ impact factors and h-indices are somewhat different in terms of the year distributions of journals’ impact factors and h-indices and the disciplines examined. The rest of this paper is organized as follows. respectively. three h-indices of each journal in 2009. the top ranked journals are deﬁned as those having the top 20% of impact factors in each subject. (2010) Hodge and Lacasse (2011) Hunt et al. 2007–2011 h-Index 2006 2001–2008 2003–2007 1995–1999.2 in the top 20%. which are artiﬁcial intelligence. and 2011 impact factors of each journal and their corresponding 5-year impact factors are collected respectively. 2. Therefore. psychiatry. 2000–2005 2000–2007 2004–2008 (1) 2009 (2) 2010 (3) 2011 Disciplines Pharmacology and pharmacy. the Publish or Perish software http://www. Section 3 presents and discusses the results. Note that. 2004–2008 2003–2007 1995–1999. Methodology and data In this study. we re-ranked the journals by combining different ranking results based on a score based approach (CombSUM). Since there are relatively few journals for some subjects. 1997) is used by Normalized score (j) = Sum score (j) − min score max score − min score (2) Table 1 Comparisons of related works. The Web of Knowledge classiﬁes the computer science discipline into seven different subjects. The Pearson product-moment correlation coefﬁcient is also used for correlation coefﬁcient analysis. 2012). software engineering.

236/0.828 .112/0.017/−0.-F. c.126 0.069 0.731/0. & Bi. Tsai / Journal of Informetrics 8 (2014) 318–328 Note that other normalization methods can also be used (Wu.143/0.098/0.209 0. c.217/0.271/0.309 0.259/0. b.5 5−3 11 − 3 =4 5−3 13 − 4 =9 5−4 2−0 =1 2−0 4−0 =2 2−0 N (b) = N (c ) = N (d) = N (e) = Table 2 Correlation coefﬁcient between IF. and C where their ranked lists of ﬁve journals (a.196/0.003/0. 5-year IF.146/0. and h-index in 2011/2010/2009. b.1 −0.075/0.525/0.717/0.06/-0.689/0. 5-year IF Artiﬁcial intelligence IF 5-year IF Information systems IF 5-year IF Interdisciplinary applications IF 5-year IF Software engineering IF 5-year IF Theory & methods IF 5-year IF 0.457/0.06 0. e) As a result. c.686/0. the Normalized score (N) of each journal is as follows: N (a) = 12 − 3 = 4.576 h-Index −0. and e) are as follows: A = (a.742/0. e) C = (c.451 0.237 0.614 0.269 0.344/0.054/0.320 C.49 0. For example.653/0.796 0. a. a.05 0. d) B = (b. b. 2006).053/0.617/0. Crestani.626/0. the Sum score (S) of each journal is computed by summing their scores in individual results as follows: S (a) = SA (a) + SB (a) + SC (a) = 5 + 3 + 4 = 12 S (b) = SA (b) + SB (b) + SC (b) = 3 + 5 + 3 = 11 S (c ) = SA (c ) + SB (c ) + SC (c ) = 4 + 4 + 5 = 13 S (d) = SA S (d) + SB (d) + SC (d) = 2 + 0 + 0 = 2 S (e) = SA (e) + SB (e) + SC (e) = 0 + 2 + 2 = 4 As a result. there are three ranking results A. d. B.252/0.217/0.485/0.325/0.

C. Tsai / Journal of Informetrics 8 (2014) 318–328 Table 3 Journal rankings obtained by different methods.-F. Journal Artiﬁcial intelligence IEEE T PATTERN ANAL MEDIMAGE ANAL SIAM J IMAGING SCI IEEE T FUZZY SYST INT J COMPUT VISION IEEE COMPUT INTELL M INT J NEURAL SYST APPL SOFT COMPUT IEEE T EVOLUT COMPUT IEEE T SYST MAN CY B PATTERN RECOGN IEEE T NEURAL NETWOR KNOW-BASED SYST IEEE T IMAGE PROCESS J MACH LEARN RES INTEGR COMPUT-AID E ARTIF LIFE ARTIF INTELL INT J SEMANT WEB INF IEEE T AUTON MENT DE Information systems IEEE COMMUN SURV TUT J AM MED INFORM ASSN MIS QUART IEEE T INFORM THEORY J CHEM INF MODEL IEEE WIREL COMMUN INFORM MANAGE-AMSTER ENTERP INF SYST-UK IEEE T MOBILE COMPUT J CHEMINFORMATICS INT J MED INFORM INFORM SCIENCES ANNU REV INFORM SCI MOB INF SYST KNOWL INF SYST INT J SEMANT WEB INF J ACM J INF TECHNOL IEEE NETWORK AD HOC NETW Interdisciplinary applications J AM MED INFORM ASSN IEEE T MED IMAGING MED IMAGE ANAL J CHEM INF MODEL J STAT SOFTW COMPUT-AIDED CIV INF IEEE T IND INFORM ENVIRON MODELL SOFTW J CHEMINFORMATIS NEUROINFORMATICS J COMPUT AID MOL DES COMPUT EDUC J COMPUT PHYS ARCH COMPUT METHOD E INTEGR COMPUT-AID E APPL SOFT COMPUT COMPUT PHYS COMMUN J MOL GRAPH MODEL COMPUT CHEM ENG MATCH-COMMUN MATH CO Software engineering ACM T GRAPHIC SIAM J IMAGING SCI IEEE T VIS COMPUT GR IEEE T SOFTWARE ENG J ACM COMMUN ACM Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 1 2 3 4 5 6 IF 1 3 2 5 6 8 4 13 9 10 18 12 15 11 14 7 19 20 17 16 1 5 3 7 2 10 19 4 16 6 12 9 8 11 18 15 13 14 17 20 1 5 3 7 2 10 19 4 16 6 12 9 8 11 18 15 13 14 17 20 2 1 4 6 3 9 5-year IF 1 5 3 6 2 12 14 13 4 10 11 9 18 8 7 17 20 15 19 16 2 3 1 5 4 9 7 6 10 8 16 13 12 17 18 14 11 15 321 h-index 1 8 12 9 14 5 7 3 16 10 4 13 2 18 17 20 6 11 15 19 6 4 11 5 12 2 1 17 3 19 7 13 15 9 8 10 16 18 20 14 6 4 11 5 12 2 1 17 3 19 7 13 15 9 8 10 16 18 20 14 5 12 6 7 10 1 2 3 1 5 4 9 7 6 10 8 16 13 12 17 18 14 11 15 2 1 6 3 5 11 .

This is reasonable because they have the same basis. In other words. Combination of multiple journal rankings Table 3 lists the journal rankings for 2011 for IF. The journal rankings obtained by combining these three citation analysis methods can be used by researchers to determine the best publication outlets in the future. 5-year IF (2005–2009). Moreover. 5-year IF.1. On the other hand. and the h-index of the journals in different subjects is analyzed.2. Correlation coefﬁcient analysis For each year (i. For example. can still be different. the correlations between the IF and 5-year IF in different subjects are either moderate or high. 5-year IF. the correlation coefﬁcient between impact factor (IF). . Tsai / Journal of Informetrics 8 (2014) 318–328 Combination 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 IF 14 5 7 12 8 19 18 15 13 17 11 16 10 20 9 6 20 14 3 1 4 2 10 15 19 5 11 7 13 18 8 16 17 12 5-year IF 9 13 10 4 8 12 18 14 15 7 17 16 h-index 2 8 9 13 16 4 3 11 14 19 17 15 18 20 1 5 8 4 6 11 2 9 10 3 16 17 12 7 14 13 18 19 15 20 10 6 18 15 2 1 4 3 11 7 17 12 9 5 13 8 16 14 19 3. This demonstrates that the journal rankings obtained with the IF. These results are consistent with the results obtained by Bador and Lafouge (2010) and Zhang (2012) which indicate that journal rankings sorted by the impact factor and h-index are somewhat different.e. Table 2 shows the results.-F. a journal with a higher impact factor does not necessarily have a higher h-index. and 2011). Therefore. Generally. 2010. the IF (2009). we examine the journal ranking results by the impact factors (IF) and h-indices of the top ranked computer science journals of the ﬁve different subjects (see Tables A1–A5 in Appendix section). Results on impact factor and h-index First of all.322 Table 3 (Continued) Journal MATH PROGRAM IEEE INTERNET COMPUT IEEE T MULTIMEDIA IEEE MICRO ACM T MATH SOFTWARE COMPUTER IEEE SOFTWARE COMPUT GRAPH FORUM IMAGE VISION COMPUT INT J ELECTRON COMM EMPIR SOFTW ENG IEEE T COMP INTEL AI INT J WEB GRID SERV IEEE T SERV COMUT Theory & methods COMMUN ACM IEEE T NEURAL NETWOR IEEE T PARALL DISTR FUZZY SET SYST IEEE T EVOLUT COMPUT ACM COMPUT SURV EVOL COMPUT HUM-COMPUT INTERACT IEEE T INF FOREN SEC IEEE ACM T NETWORK STAT COMPUT QUANTUM INF COMPUT J CRYPTOL J ACM INFORM FUSION FOUND COMPUT MATH ACM T COMPUT SYST IEEE T SYST MAN CY A ARTIF LIFE FUTURE GENER COMP SY C. and their combination as calculated by the CombSUM combination method. although these journals are all top ranked computer science journals the results also allow researchers to further judge the top ranked journals in terms of their quality. the correlation between the IF and h-index is always low. the SIAM journal of imaging science had the second highest impact factor in 2011. and h-index (2009) of each journal are analyzed. but its h-index ranked it as the 13-th journal. 5-year IF. and h-index citation analysis methods. For the example of 2009.3. 3. h-index. while the correlation between the 5-year IF and h-index is relatively high. Results and discussion 3. except for information systems in 2010. 3. it may not be sufﬁcient to rely on only one speciﬁc method to determine journal rankings. 2009.

when necessary they can be used to determine the grades of the top ranked journals. 4.37 2.952 2. information systems.967 2.736 3.561 2.612 2.838 3.196 5.971 4.172 1. although some studies have shown that there is a strong relation between impact factor and h-index. including artiﬁcial intelligence. we combine different ranking results using the CombSUM combination method to re-rank the computer science journals.31 2.428 2.908 4.974 2. our analytical results indicate that the correlations between these citation based approaches in the ﬁve computer science subjects are low. B+.04 1. At the same time.151 4.905 2.533 5-year IF 6.581 2. etc.971 2.308 5.282 2.364 4.77 3.129 3.08 3. Tsai / Journal of Informetrics 8 (2014) 318–328 323 importance.422 2. However.664 2.274 3.292 2. Journal 2011 IEEE T PATTERN ANAL SIAM J IMAGING SCI MED IMAGE ANAL INT J NEURAL SYST IEEE T FUZZY SYST INT J COMPUT VISION INTEGR COMPUT-AID E IEEE COMPUT INTELL M IEEE T EVOLUT COMPUT IEEE T SYST MAN CY B IEEE T IMAGE PROCESS IEEE T NEURAL NETWOR APPL SOFT COMPUT J MACH LEARN RES KNOWL-BASED SYST IEEE T AUTON MENT DE INT J SEMANT WEB INF PATTERN RECOGN ARTIF LIFE ARTIF INTELL 2010 IEEE T PATTERN ANAL INT J COMPUT VISION SIAM J IMAGING SCI IEEE T EVOLUT COMPUT MED IMAGE ANAL INT J NEURAL SYST INT J INF TECH DECIS J MACH LEARN RES COMPUT LINGUIST IEEE T IMAGE PROCESS IEEE COMPUT INTELL M J WEB SEMANT IEEE T SYST MAN CY B IEEE T FUZZY SYST PATTERN RECOGN EVOL COMPUT IEEE T NEURAL NETWOR IEEE INTELL SYST COMPUT VIS IMAGE UND ARTIF INTELL IF 4.593 3.7 4.362 7. However. In particular.76 3.-F.314 3.534 6. A.632 2.967 3.042 2.918 2.337 3.C.163 2.57 2.205 4. In this paper.86 4. and h-indices. First of all. software engineering.26 3.31 1. 5-year IF.191 4. and reputation.682 2.308 2.741 3. The impact factor and h-index are well known citation based approaches. The new ranking results can be referenced by researchers when deciding on their publication outlets.695 2.633 2. the ranking results for each year can be different because of different IF.451 3.424 2.699 2.5 4.403 4. Conclusion Journal rankings obtained from citation analysis are regarded as one of the most objective ranking methods. Appendix A.5 5. for example A+.48 4.986 4.139 2.652 2.424 4.574 4.789 2.341 3.512 2. As a result.045 4. some have found that journals with high impact factors may not have high h-indices.085 5.119 h-Index 37 13 16 9 20 18 7 7 15 18 24 21 25 21 18 7 3 37 10 24 44 29 15 20 22 16 9 35 46 35 14 1 24 30 60 28 27 30 22 34 . which have been used in many different disciplines.534 2. interdisciplinary applications. ﬁve different computer science subjects classiﬁed by the Web of Science are examined. This implies that it may not be reliable or sufﬁcient to use only one of these methods for journal rankings.63 2.432 4.656 4.368 3.252 5. we focus on analyzing the correlation between the impact factor and h-index of top ranked computer science journals. and theory & methods.75 3.284 4. Table A1 Impact factors and h-indices of top ranked journals in artiﬁcial intelligence.237 3.

329 3.622 3.019 2.214 2.036 3.479 .902 4.778 2.103 3.311 4.419 4.795 3.907 2.492 2.588 2.789 2.191 3.952 4.117 2.054 3.324 Table A1 (Continued) Journal 2009 COMPUT INTELL IEEE T EVOLUT COMPUT IEEE T PATTERN ANAL INT J COMPUT VISION J WEB SEMANT IEEE T FUZZY SYST IEEE INTELL SYST EVOL COMPUT MED IMAGE ANAL ARTIF INTELL IEEE T SST MAN CY B INT J NEURAL SYST DATA MIN KNOWL DISC INT J INNOV COMPUT I EXPERT SYST APPL IEEE T NEURAL NETWOR IEEE T IMAGE PROCESS J MACH LEARN RES DECIS SUPPORT SYST IEEE COMPUT INTELL M C.821 3.343 3.833 2.114 2.144 3.709 3 1.412 3.378 4.353 2.225 2.735 3.162 3.381 2.657 3.988 2.908 2.11 5.408 3.593 4.508 3.282 2.198 5-year IF 5.378 3.901 3.932 2.009 2.216 5.414 2.95 2.015 h-Index 52 29 50 31 2 32 36 36 29 49 36 15 45 18 62 31 36 38 29 11 Table A2 Impact factors and h-indices of top ranked journals in information systems.847 4.984 2.305 7.819 9.711 4.447 3.789 2.151 3.748 2.-F.941 3.575 2.728 2.75 3.609 3.842 4.621 6.239 2.9 2.955 2.594 4.984 3.007 2.627 2.675 4.497 3.447 3. Journal 2011 IEEE COMMUN SURV TUT J CHEM INF MODEL MIS QUART ENTERP INF SYST-UK J AM MED INFORM ASSN J CHEMINFORMATICS IEEE T INFORM THEORY ANNU REV INFORM SCI INFORM SCIENCES IEEE WIREL COMMUN MOB INF SYST INT J MED INFORM J ACM J INF TECHNOL INT J SEMANT WEB INF IEEE T MOBILE COMPUT IEEE NETWORK KNOWL INF SYST INFORM MANAGE-AMSTER AD HOC NETW 2010 IBM J RES DEV MIS QUART J CHEM INF MODEL IEEE COMMUN SURV TUT J ACM INT J INF TECH DECIS J AM MED INFORM ASSN J INF TECHNOL J STRATEGIC INF SYST INFORM SCIENCES J WEB SEMANT IEEE T INFORM THEORY J MANAGE INFORM SYST INFORM MANAGE-AMSTER IEEE T MOBILE COMPUT ACM T SENSOR NETWORK INT J MED INFORM J ASSOC INF SYST VLDB J IF 6. Tsai / Journal of Informetrics 8 (2014) 318–328 IF 5.496 4.889 2.375 3.088 2.519 7.662 2.009 3.513 4.283 2.432 2.722 8.419 3.139 4.589 4.822 3.796 h-Index 19 16 23 16 20 10 39 4 29 25 7 13 15 11 3 19 19 17 18 15 7 31 26 21 17 9 23 20 10 36 1 46 16 25 28 16 23 15 14 3.432 2.313 4.139 3.848 2.424 7.622 2.462 4.277 3.244 2.684 3.622 5-year IF 4.24 4.692 3.093 3.217 2.836 2.321 2.308 2.128 2.041 3.

3 2.582 3.364 3.622 2. Tsai / Journal of Informetrics 8 (2014) 318–328 Table A2 (Continued) Journal IEEE PERVAS COMPUT 2009 VLDB J MIS QUART J AM MED INFORM ASSN J CHEM INF MODEL J WEB SEMANT INFORM SCIENCES INT J MED INFORM IEEE PERVAS COMPUT DATA MIN KNOWL DISC ANNU REV INFORM SCI ACM T WEB ENTERP INFORM SYST J ACM IEEE T MOBILE COMPUT DECIS SUPPORT SYST IEEE WIREL COMMUN IEEE T INFORM THEORY INT J SEMANT WEB INF J AM SOC INF SCI TEC IEEE T KNOWL DATA EN IF 2.208 5.728 2.382 3.621 2.114 2.871 2.027 2.374 3.767 2.33 1.105 4.485 3.285 5-year IF 3.17 3.03 2.357 2.534 3.647 2.3 2.987 9.63 3.161 4.432 3.923 3.132 2.088 3.95 2.412 3.126 3.184 2.97 2.643 3.329 2.305 4.612 2.95 2.166 3.717 2.386 3.451 3.522 2.097 5-year IF 4.345 2.394 2.822 3.512 4.32 2.079 2.691 h-Index 20 23 29 35 34 2 46 28 26 45 9 14 20 28 30 29 59 51 9 33 27 325 Table A3 Impact factors and h-indices of top ranked journals in interdisciplinary applications.791 4.302 1.971 2.01 3.139 3.812 3.842 4.882 3.609 3.941 3.48 3.877 2.2 3.675 4.438 3.617 2.323 2.189 4.813 3.395 4.812 2.089 3.061 4.704 2.424 4.99 2.826 4.163 3.86 2.654 2.346 2.647 2.268 3.722 4.105 2.9 2.-F. Journal 2011 J CHEM INF MODEL MED IMAGE ANAL J STAT SOFTW IEEE T MED IMAGING J AM MED INFORM ASSN INTEGR COMPUT-AID E J CHEMINFORMATICS J COMPUT AID MOL DES COMPUT-AIDED CIV INF COMPUT PHYS COMMIUN ENVIRON MODELL SOFTW IEEE T IND INFORM NEUROINFORMATICS ARCH COMPUT METHOD E COMPUT EDUC APPL SOFT COMPUT COMPUT CHEM ENG J COMPUT PHYS J MOL HTSPH MODEL MATCH-COMMUN MATH CO 2010 MED IMAGE ANAL J CHEM INF MODEL IEEE T MED IMAGING J COMPUT AID MOL DES MATCH-COMMUN MATH CO COMPUT-AIDED CIV INF INT J INF TECH DECIS J AM MED INFORM ASSN NEUROINFORMATICS COMPUT LINGUIST ENVIRON MODELL SOFTW ARCH COMPUT METHOD E J STAT SOFTW COMPUT EDUC J COMPUT PHYS COMPUT PHYS COMMUN INTEGR COMPUT-AID E IEEE T SYST MAN CY C APPL SOFT COMPUT IF 4.C.56 3.366 6.672 2.148 2.76 2.199 3.085 4.122 2.7 2.639 3.108 h-index 16 16 18 21 20 7 10 11 20 21 19 20 12 5 25 25 16 20 9 1 22 26 32 14 1 23 9 23 12 20 25 10 17 41 31 24 11 2 24 .191 3.517 4.419 3.973 2.936 2.493 2.868 2.291 3.665 2.31 2.404 2.631 3.419 3.974 3.956 2.929 2.809 2.291 3.

468 5.169 2.093 3.116 2.514 2. Tsai / Journal of Informetrics 8 (2014) 318–328 IF 2.023 1.461 h-index 20 35 34 19 19 3 29 28 19 13 23 28 38 14 15 17 7 16 19 40 45 Table A4 Impact factors and h-indices of top ranked journals in software engineering.246 2.32 2.76 1.353 2.467 2. Journal 2011 SIAM IMAGING SCI ACM T GRAPHIC J ACM IEEE T VIS COMPUT GR IEEE INTERNET COMPUT IEEE T SOFTWARE ENG IEEE T MULTIMEDIA ACM T MATH SOFTWARE COMMUN ACM INT J WEB GRID SERV EMPIR SOFTW ENG IEEE MICRO IMAGE VISION COMPUT MATH PROGRAM COMPUT GRAPH FORUM IEEE T COMP INTEL AI INT J ELECTRON COMM IEEE SOFTWARE COMPUTER IEEE T SERV COMPUT 2010 IBM J RES DEV SIAM J IMAGING SCI ACM T GRAPHIC J ACM J WEB SEMAT IEEE MICRO IEEE INTERNET COMPUT COMMUN ACM IEEE T SOFTWARE ENG J DATABASE MANAGE MATH PROGRAM IEEE T VIS COMP0UT GR ACM T WEB COMPUTER EMPIR SOFTW ENG IBM SYST J IEEE T MULTIMEDIA IF 4.098 3.217 3.789 2.951 3.027 2.793 2.216 4.632 3.369 2.215 2 1.496 2.5 2.97 1.922 1.426 1.835 3.432 2.63 2.085 3.375 2.909 1.489 2.164 2.922 1.326 Table A3 (Continued) Journal COMPUT CHEM ENG 2009 J AM MED INFORM ASSN J CHEM INF MODEL J COMPUT AID MOL DES IEEE T MED IMAGING MATCH-COMMUN MATH CO MED IMAGE ANAL ENVIRON MODELL SOFTW NEUROINFORMATICS QSAR COMB SCI J BIOMED INFORM APPL SOFT COMPUT J COMPUT PHYS J MOL MODEL J STAT SOFTW IEEE ACM T COMPUT BI COMPUT LINGUIST J MOL GRAPH MODEL SCIENTOMETRICS COMPUT OPER RES COMPUT EDUC C.212 2.826 2.072 3.182 1.147 2.709 2.656 3.527 2.47 1.469 2.121 1.796 1.167 2.552 3.422 2.919 1.665 4.792 1.974 3.054 3.707 1.415 2.443 2.019 3.952 2.-F.593 3.617 2.579 .79 5-year IF 5.919 1.026 3.362 2.98 1.783 1.111 h-index 13 19 15 19 16 19 16 9 27 7 9 11 11 25 15 10 7 22 22 7 7 15 31 17 1 20 18 43 23 8 22 23 9 28 15 0 17 3.236 5.781 2.617 1.812 1.336 2.743 2.723 1.815 1.854 1.583 4.882 3.4 2.631 3.935 1.636 1.804 1.5 3.034 2.714 2.045 4.493 3.681 4.443 2.978 2.55 1.038 2.265 2.508 1.395 2.54 3.722 2.199 3.5 1.819 4.645 3.113 1.222 2.19 1.059 5-year IF 2.5 4.468 3.

05 2.649 2.804 4.659 1.54 1.603 3.821 1.029 2 1.493 2.019 2.763 5-year IF 2.717 2.909 4.551 3.494 2.664 2.C.508 3.2 2.917 2.885 1.311 8 5.143 2.208 1.282 2.731 4.432 4.658 3.516 1.988 1.123 2.619 3.467 1.403 4 3.371 2.759 1.978 1.723 1.205 2.594 2.093 2.264 3.865 5.952 2.321 2.476 1.375 2.813 4.362 2.077 2.155 1.564 h-index 11 8 11 26 47 2 23 23 14 28 31 52 35 14 10 27 38 12 7 13 28 29 15 327 Table A5 Impact factors and h-indices of top ranked journals in theory & methods.805 1.093 1.694 1.762 2.675 2.039 2.204 2.633 2.228 10.412 2.709 1. Tsai / Journal of Informetrics 8 (2014) 318–328 Table A4 (Continued) Journal IEEE COMPUT GRAPH ACM T SOFTW ENG METH ACM T MATH SOFTWARE 2009 IEEE T SOFTWARE ENG ACM T GRAPHIC J WEB SEMANT IEEE MICRO IEEE INTERNET COMPUT ACM T WEB J ACM IEEE T VIS COMPUT GR COMMUN ACM COMPUTER IEEE T DEPEND SECURE ACM T INTERNET TECHN MATH PROGRAM IEEE SOFTWARE ACM T SOFTW ENG METH J DATABASE MANAGE ACM T MATH SOFWARE IEEE T MULTIMEDIA INFORM SOFTWARE TECH WORLD WIDE WEB IF 1.582 4.372 1.402 1.205 3.154 2.822 1.91 3.889 2.353 2.75 3. Journal 2011 ACM COMPUT SURV FOUND COMPUT MATH IEEE T EVOLUT COMPUT IEEE T NEURAL NETWOR J ACM ARTIF LIFE IEEE T SYST MAN CY A IEEE ACM T NETWORK FUTURE GENER COMP SY COMMUN ACM FUZZY SET SYST IMAGE VISION COMPUT QUANTUM INF COMPUT COMPUT METH PROG BIO HUM-COMPUT INTERACT INFORM FUSION STAT COMPUT IEEE T PARALL DISTR IEEE T INF FOREN SEC PARALLEL COMPUT 2010 ACM COMPUT SURV IBM J RES DEV IEEE T EVOLUT COMPUT HUM-COMPUT INTERACT J ACM J CRYPTOL EVOL COMPUT IEEE T NEURAL NETWOR FOUND COMPUT MATH FUTURE GENER COMP SY COMMUN ACM SIAM J COMPUT IEEE ACM T NETWORK ARTIF LIFE IEEE T SYST MAN CY A ACM T COMPUT SYST QUANTUM INF COMPUT FUZZY SET SYST IF 4.033 1.78 2.34 1.008 1.053 2.812 2.216 4.226 2.429 1.819 5.919 1.402 2.113 1.35 2.736 3.652 2.412 3.25 h-index 15 11 15 21 15 10 1 22 1 27 14 11 7 12 11 7 11 24 16 17 14 7 20 20 17 10 28 27 12 0 43 33 29 9 2 7 4 22 .108 2.615 3.-F.293 2.346 2.144 2.745 1.314 3.835 2.75 1.426 1.875 5-year IF 9.048 2.531 3.889 1.37 2.529 3.341 2.743 2.012 3.643 3.904 1.21 3.164 2.768 2.292 2.169 2.424 2.

19 4. R. (2012). 41–46. . Yu. A Google scholar h-index for journals: An alternative metric to measure journal impact in economics & business? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 29–33. S.98 2.655 2. 16569–16572.381 2..826 7. F. Using the h-index to measure the quality of journals in the ﬁeld of business and management.676 12. (2003). (2010). R. & Walter. V. T. The Publish or Perish Book. A.551 3. J. H. 42.856 3. S. 44(9).821 1. & Wang. R. Evaluating score normalization methods in data fusion. Automatic ranking of information retrieval systems using data fusion.532 2. 112. 191–197. 102(46).05 2. P. Hunt.556 2.033 1. Ranking forestry journals using the h-index.667 6.339 2. Analyses of multiple evidence combination. Nuray. G. An index to quantify an individual’s scientiﬁc research output.. Harvard Review of Psychiatry. A. Communications of the ACM.. 595–614. Harzing.733 5-year IF 2. E. W. Macri. 46(10). Re-ranking of high-impact AI journals based on h-index. Journal of the American Medical Association. Y.315 7. Zhang. 642–648. W. & Can. L. Han. The history and meaning of the journal impact factor. J. Hirsch. Objective quality ranking of computing journals. & van der Wal. 65–69.138 2.-F. M. G. P. W.071 1. Identifying and evaluating the universe of outlets for information systems research: Ranking the journals. E... (2010).. Melbourne. Psychiatry and the Hirsch h-index: The relationship between journal impact factors and accrued citations.. 60(1).851 1. J. Global perceptions of IS journals. Evaluating journal quality: Is the h-index a better measure than impact factors? Research on Social Work Practice. 326–334. N. 295. Peffers. In ACM International Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (pp.532 2. 18(4). 2(4). 5.. 9(1).338 2.. 1552–1555.. F. (1997). (2006). J.7 7. Comparative analysis between impact factor and h-index for reproduction biology journals. F.621 4. 234–241. (2012). & Lacasse. Comparative analysis between impact factor and h-index for pharmacology and psychiatry journals. Han. Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances.. (2010). Information Processing and Management.. Hodge. & Tang.589 3. Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application. Communications of the ACM.664 3. (2011). Mingers.902 4.051 2. & Petrovici.. 48(2). & Hong. (2009).322 2. Australia: Tarma Software Research Pty Ltd. 222–230. Harzing. 267–276).. Y. Wu. 84(1).212 2. Q.889 2.96 1. Cleary. 63–84. Information Processing & Management. R. Engineering Education and Management. (2008).103 2.203 h-index 11 22 16 23 29 36 11 31 28 6 52 23 13 0 12 32 35 1 12 13 12 26 References Bador. 111–114. Katerattanakul.717 2. 207–219. Asia Conference on Information Retrieval Technology. B. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Vanclay. (2003). & Theoharakis. Crestani. K.752 2. Tsai / Journal of Informetrics 8 (2014) 318–328 IF 1.2 3. (2005). E. Garﬁeld. Mylonopoulos. Y. D. (2001).. 21(2).346 2.291 3.622 2.. (2010). (2006).905 1.328 Table A5 (Continued) Journal STAT COMPUT IEEE T INF FOREN SEC 2009 ACM COMPUT SURV HUM-COMPUT INTERACT IEEE T EVOLUT COMPUT EVOL COMPUT QUANTUM INF COMPUT IEEE T NEURAL NETWOR J ACM ACM T COMPUT SYST COMMUN ACM IEEE T INF FOREN SEC J CRYPTOL FUTURE GENER COMP SY INFORM FUSION FUZZY SET SYST IEEE ACM T NETWORK IEEE T SYST MAN CY A ARTIF LIFE FOUND COMPUT MATH STAT COMPUT IEEE T PARALL DISTR C. Journal of Informetrics. & Lafouge. Lee. (2006).297 2. 90–93. D. J. & Bi. K. Scientometrics.229 2.

- Abs Journal RankingUploaded byMarin Jovanovic
- “a Study on Employees Strain Causes With Special Reference to Titan Industries Limited, Hosur”.Uploaded byCHEIF EDITOR
- mapping chemical science research.pdfUploaded byguns
- RM unit 1Uploaded byKanchanBirwal
- ELS LC Metrics Poster June 23 2016Uploaded byChiribirip
- mkg-ipr-part5Uploaded bySuvra Pattanayak
- Penetrating the Omerta of Predatory PublishingUploaded byMIlojica K. Radic
- srmuniv.ac - Academia - Academic Web Services.pdfUploaded byAnmol Chawla
- 01 - On the Craft of Effective ReadingUploaded byregianesobrinho
- Mikolas l 2017Uploaded byAvish Gunnuck
- Measuring Scholarly Impact of JournalsUploaded byM S Sridhar
- cacmapr05Uploaded byMiguel Tapia
- Being a Scientits TodayUploaded byFelipe de Abreu
- New Europe College Yearbook_2011-2012Uploaded bygentile02
- Sem Charts SingleUploaded byAbdul Quadeer
- Summary of Research FindingUploaded byapi-3825557
- Pres2 History of ExtensionUploaded byVal Vincent Maligmat Losaria
- glpo cheat sheetUploaded byapi-108091176
- Session 06 BpUploaded byapi-3719061
- Internship Annotated BibliographyUploaded bySusan Moore
- PGCE Primary and Early Years Pre Course Reading 2013 (1)Uploaded byalexsia_andrews
- portfolio reflection 3 3Uploaded byapi-317706870
- FORMAT.THESIS.docxUploaded byLorraine Tomas
- Rigor and RelevanceUploaded byHira Saleem
- brm finalUploaded byHarish Ashok
- EPS2013278S&EUploaded byRigo LC
- Buying Behaviour Fairness Creams ProjectUploaded bySushmitha Serarajan
- Refined Done My Introduction PaperUploaded byapi-3715308
- Title PageUploaded byEps Sabangan
- DissertationUploaded byAggie Kui