Journal Citations in the Iranian Journal of Translation Studies

Studies:
udies:
A Bibliometrical Analysis1

___________________________ Hamid Varmazyari2

________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________

Abstract
The development of the field of Translation and Interpreting Studies requires
applying new methods of analysis and interpretation. One such means is
bibliometrics, to use the term in a general sense, which helps researchers in
analyzing scholarly publications. Taking a bibliometric approach, the present
paper analyzes citations to a selection of translation and interpreting international
journals in the articles published in the Iranian Journal of Translation Studies
during a period of 10 years in order to investigate the popularity, accessibility and
citability of such journals. In so doing, this study, while touching upon the notion of
quality, also sheds lights on some advantages of introducing bibliometrics into
translation and interpreting studies and serves as a source of information
concerning these journals and journal ranking. The results found Meta, Target and
Across Languages and Cultures as the three most cited journals and some
relationship between journal accessibility and popularity/citability.
Keywords: Bibliometrics, citation analysis, journals, translation and interpreting
studies, ranking, quality

1. Introduction
Bibliometrics, which essentially aims at analyzing scientific publications from
different perspectives and for different purposes, has proved successful in
contributing valuable insights to many aspects of the evolution of scientific fields.
The need for publication analysis in translation and interpreting studies (henceforth
T & I Studies), in general, is felt more than ever, as the field is being expanded both
qualitatively and quantitatively (Franco Aixelá, 2013, p. 7). The present paper

1. This paper was received on 24.07.2016 and approved on 03.10.2016.

2. PhD Candidate, Department of English Translation Studies, Allameh Tabatabai'e University, and
instructor, English Department, Arak University; email: h.varmazyari1@gmail.com
72 Translation Studies, Vol. 14, No. 55, Autumn 2016

aimed at explicating this approach, which has recently gained momentum and
demand, besides discussing other relevant topics including advantages of taking a
bibliometric approach to research in T & I Studies.

As an empirical work using bibliometrics, we performed a citation analysis in the

Iranian Journal of Translation Studies in which citations to 16 leading journals were

studied. In other words, to discover to what extent and contemplate why

international translation and interpreting journals are known, favored and used by

Iranian scholars, the present study attempted to look at a number of factors

influencing citations in the Iranian journal of Translation Studies to 16 well-reputed

journals. To this end, three factors of popularity, accessibility, and citablitity were

investigated in analyzing the “works cited” and “‫ ”ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ‬sections of 40 issues (issues

11-50) of the stated journal over a span of 10 years since 2005. It was also hoped

that through this piece of research younger scholars get to know more about such

journals.

Popularity refers to the extent the journals are known by Iranian T & I Studies
community; accessibility indicates if the journals provide users with partial or total
free access and citability here means the extent to which it is likely that publications
in such journals be cited by the Iranian scientific community. The last factor may
require other methods such as interview with scholars to be adequately measured
but the researcher mainly concentrated on the interrelationships resulting from
popularity and accessibility.

What needs to be added here is that the Iranian Journal of Translation Studies
publishes articles both in English and Persian. This does not imply the authors who
wrote in Persian, would not be able to use the journals under investigation but as
the researcher observed, citations to such journals were very rare if any and the
authors showed a tendency to use references in the language of their articles and
 Journal Citations in the Iranian Journal of Translation Studies … 73

the languages, such as Russian or French, in which they are known for as
specialists.

1.1.
1.1. Research Question and Hypothesis
As outlined above, this study is an attempt to answer the following question:

Q: To what extent are international T & I Studies journals popular, available and
citable in the community of Iranian researchers and is there a meaningful
relationship between them?

Accordingly, our hypothesis is:

H: There is no significant relationship between journal accessibility on the one hand

and citation frequency and popularity on the other.

Chronologically, the older a journal and an issue, the more the chances for its being
cited both because this will raise its reputation through citations and since journals
generally allow a comparatively freer access to their older issues.

1.2.
1.2. A Brief History of Bibliometrics and Citation Analysis
Grbić (2013, p. 20) defines bibliometrics “as the science of measuring and
analyzing academic publications and scholarly communication”. Different
foundations can be traced for bibliometrics. These comprise empirical,
philosophical, and mathematical as introduced by De Bellis (2009). Although there
seems to exist no serious controversy over the definition and the scope of this branch
of social studies, this will be more fully explored in the section on terminology.

Now, it would be illuminating to indicate the origins of bibliometrics. Chin Roemer

and Borchardt (2015) present the origins of bibliometrics in the following
introduction to their book:
74 Translation Studies, Vol. 14, No. 55, Autumn 2016

While coined as a term in the late 1960s by Alan Pritchard as “the

application of mathematics and statistical methods to books and other
media of communication,” the idea of bibliometrics goes back decades
further to at least the 1940s and the time of S. R. Ranganathan, whom
students of library and information science will remember (some more
fondly than others) as the father of information science and a fervent lover
of all things bibliographic and statistical. (pp. 27-28)

And while one might assume bibliometrics to be a quite new scientific approach,
Chin Roemer and Borchardt (2015) contest this misconception when they write:

Bibliometrics was therefore born not only at a time when books and
journals monopolized scholarly communication, but also in an academic
era that had yet to see the rise of personal computers, let alone word
processing, the Internet, or mobile devices. Its early champions were also
almost exclusively scientists and science-oriented librarians, whose mutual
interest in scientometrics–kanother mid-century “-ometrics” field that
focused, as one might guess, on measuring science scholarship–set the
disciplinary tone for bibliometric research for decades to come. (p. 28)

The American Eugene Garfield is known as the scholar with the largest contribution
to the development of bibliometrics/sciecometrics. He is considered a father of
sciencometrics who founded “the Institute for Science Information (ISI), a
groundbreaking research center that, [inter alia] created the Science Citation Index
(SCI), and invented the calculation for journal impact factor, which remains over
half a century later the “gold standard” for measuring impact across the sciences”
(p. 28). His educational background in library science as well as chemistry before
earning a PhD in structural linguistics inspired him to follow his concern, in the
1950s, of devising a system of 'citation-based index' which would enable the
filtration of articles with lower qualities to be cited by authors. Although presently
the idea of filtration seems outdated when one considers online sources, it made
sense at its own time. What has remained viable, however, is the fact that
researchers still get in touch with each other through citations (p. 29).
 Journal Citations in the Iranian Journal of Translation Studies … 75

1.3.
1.3. How are Journal
Journal Citations Different From Referring to Other Works?
Succinctly, journal publications serve as shortcuts as they directly take us to the core
of a body of knowledge and assertions about certain scientific topics. Thus, they can
help save time searching different resources firsthand. In addition, as Hermans
(2007) points out, 'second-order observation', performed when for example one
consults journal articles, has a number of benefits:

Because second-order observation is interested in the way observers

observe, it generates uncertainty. What seems self-evident to a first-order
observer appears as the outcome of a particular presupposition when
viewed from another angle. Second-order observation thus seeks to reveal
what Hans-Georg Gadamer called “the tyranny of hidden prejudices”
(1989: 270), the ideas and categories one takes for granted as a child of
one's age. By observing first-order observers from a position different from
theirs, second-order observation constructs a different rationale for the
actions and distinctions made by first-order observers. It may also
distinguish statement from meaning— distinguish, that is, between what
someone's words ostensibly say and what the observer construes as the
unspoken assumptions undergirding those words (Esposito 1996: 600). (p.
128)

Furthermore, since most journal publications reflect more up-to-date research trends
than books, citing their recent published articles can indicate both the novelty of the
topic and the familiarity of the researcher with the developments in the area they
are undertaking research. Therefore, such citations might be an indication of the
value and of the novelty of one's research. On the other hand, research works void
of recent (state-of-the-art) resources are generally deemed lacking or insufficient by
the general research community. But what causes researchers to ignore journals?
Several reasons can be thought of, among which we are considering journal
popularity, accessibility and citability.

On the contrary, one may argue though less firmly that journal articles may be
misleading since they are secondary resources produced as a result of others'
76 Translation Studies, Vol. 14, No. 55, Autumn 2016

interpretations of a given subject and if not sophisticated in development and

profound in thought, might not serve, using Newton's famous expression, as high
shoulders on which to stand and see a given topic.

1.4.
1.4. Terms and Terminology
Although the study of literature is now a century old, 'bibliometrics' found its first
print appearance in 1969 (Andrés, 2009, p. 2). Initially, bibliometrics intended to
study 'information processes' while scientometrics, which appeared around the
same time aimed at measuring 'science communication' but now the two terms are
used to refer to the same thing, i.e. studying literature (Andrés, 2009, p. 2). More
specifically defined, bibliometrics deals with recorded information while
scientometrics pertains to quantitative features of science. Grbić (2013, p. 20)
points out the diversity of usage of the two terms by scholars who can be put under
three categories: those who use the terms 'synonymously', those who see
bibliometrics as the covering term and those belonging to the following recent
terminology movement set by Björneborn and Ingwersen's 2001 work (as cited in
Grbić, 2013, p. 20). They introduced informatics, covering bibliometrics and
scientometrics, defined as the statistical or quantitative study of information and
webometrics (cybermetrics) which analyzes electronic resources (Andrés, 2009, p.
2). Scintometrics in this approach transcends bibliometrics “as it also addresses
societal, economical, and policy questions not covered by bibliometrics, using other
quantitative aspects of a discipline as e.g. economical data and not just records in
bibliographies” (Grbić, 2013, p. 20).

Citation analysis is a sub-area within bibliometrics which can be performed for

different purposes including the ones intended in the current study. Andrés (2009,
p. 2) mentions Gross and Gross (1927)'s research as pioneering in citation
analysis, where they identified high-impact journals in their own field. A similarly
 Journal Citations in the Iranian Journal of Translation Studies … 77

important study by Bradford (1934, p. 2) looked at the frequency by which papers

were distributed across journals. Generally speaking, within bibliometrics and
sciencometrics studies, frequently applied methods are the analysis and counting of
publications, citations, words, and social networks (Grbić, 2013, p. 22). These
quantitative methods have recently been complemented by qualitative ones such as
interviews.

The above short discussion demonstrates that informetrics has generally become a
huge area of investigation and biblio/scientometrics in particular can have a large
number of applications as they deal with the science about science. Such analytical
approaches provide researchers with different maps of the fields showing what
areas or aspects have been under-researched and need more scholarly attention.

1.5. Impact Factor

Citation analysis is closely associated with metrics to indicate the citation degree of
published works. One such metric developed by Garfield is the 'Impact Factor'. IF,
as explained by Franco Aixelá (2013, p.8), is calculated “by a simple division,
where the numerator is the number of citations received by articles in the journal
published in the two previous years, whereas the denominator is the number of
'citable' articles”. He illustrates the method by the following example:

If the 50 citable articles published in a journal between 2007 and 2008

were cited a total of 125 times by the end of 2009, the IF (125 divided by
50) of that journal for year 2009 would be 2.5. (p. 8)

1.5.1.
1.5.1. Pros and Cons of IF
Despite the advantages considered and conceivable for IF, i.e. tending to be
objective and cutting expenses for institutions because it allows them to limit their
order to the journals most read or cited, Franco Aixelá (2013, pp. 9-11) insightfully
78 Translation Studies, Vol. 14, No. 55, Autumn 2016

explains the cons of IF. It would be noteworthy to touch on the main shortcoming
here: Is IF the only or the best journal quality indicator? In other words, is the

journal important or the article quality or one should take a middle-road

approach? To cite Franco Aixelá's (2013, p.9) verbatim, “being the most read
or mentioned and being ‘the best’ (i.e. the most ground-breaking,
methodologically sound and the best structured piece of research) are completely
different things”. As it is important to clarify this differentiation, more
explanation is provided in the following part.

1.5.1.1.
1.5.1.1. Why Impact and Quality Should be Treated Differently?
Franco Aixelá (2013, pp. 10-11) raises a number of issues serving as answers to
this question. For the sake of brevity, some of them are merged into the same entry:

1. Do academic fields enjoy the same amount of popularity over time? IF does not
take this into account yet offers some journals ranking in most fields. In addition,
general subfields or works published as reference works are more attention-
getting than specific works.
2. Journal language and its distribution. Naturally English-written articles are
expected to have a higher number of potential readers. A large number of T & I
Studies journals thus go unnoticed by Thomson Reuters system as the majority of
high-ranked scientific journals are predominantly written in English. Moreover,
distribution channels play a role in the outreach of the journals.
3. Our citations are not always to praise cited works or researchers. Sometimes,
we cite others to criticize them.
4. Authors’ and journals’ self-citations. Authors tend to cite themselves and articles
in the same journal are more likely to be cited by other authors wishing to get
published in the given journal.
 Journal Citations in the Iranian Journal of Translation Studies … 79

5. Publication life. Whereas in 'hard sciences' publication life is limited to two

years after publication of an article, in humanities and in T & I Studies it is not
uncommon to cite works even 20 years or more after their publication.
6. How many journals/books must be selected to be checked for “citing and cited
publications” (2013, p. 11)? What determines this?

2. Literature Review
In this section, we will present a number of the most important research studies that
used biblio/scientometrics in T & I Studies, considering the fact that this approach is
quite new to the field. Primarily, it is necessary to note that Grbić (2013) categorizes
the coverage of bibliometrics and scientometrics research into four areas:

(a) the evolution and (b) the characterization of a given field, (c) the
evaluation of scholarly communities and (d) diffusion studies, which focus
on the evolution and transfer of ideas within and across disciplines
(Borgman 1990: 17—20). This means that data can either be used for
descriptive historical or sociological analysis or as the basis for an
evaluation of individual researchers', research groups', departments',
universities', or a given country's scientific productivity. (p. 21)

2.1.
2.1. Bibliometrics in T & I Studies
Except for (d), which appears under-researched in T & I Studies, examples of the
other three categories can be found in the field. The present study tends to fall into
the third group because it looks into the citation behavior of Iranian scholars and
tries to find answers to few relevant questions. In what follows, a selection of
important T & I Studies research using bibliometrics are briefly introduced.
80 Translation Studies, Vol. 14, No. 55, Autumn 2016

The first study published in the area of bibliometrics, as pointed out by some
scholars including Grbić (2013, p. 22) is the corpus-based analysis performed by
Pöchhacker (1995) and Gile (2000) in which they focused on 'publication counting'
and 'word analysis' to illuminate favorite research topics. In a similar study, Gile
(2006) analyzed references to identify frequently-cited authors and 'reference types'
(Grbić, 2013, p. 22).

Zhang et al (2015) reviewed eight major translation studies journals using

bibliometrics to outline the general trend of the research field and then by means of
thematic analysis they identified the major trends of research.

Another influential study with bibliometric aims was carried out by Franco Aixelá
(2013) in which he investigated, besides a sound theoretical discussion, the main
interests and key figures in translation studies, using BITRA (Bibliography of
Interpreting and Translation developed by the University of Alicante, Spain).

Finally, Grbić (2013, p. 22) mentions Rovira-Esteva and Orero (2011) as two
scholars who studied the publication behavior of researchers at Spanish universities.

3. Methodology
The journals chosen for this study are top-ranked international journals based on
The SCImago Journal & Country Rank portal available online, which relies on the
information in the Scopus® database. In addition, three journals indexed in ISI, i.e.
Meta, the Journal of Specialized Translation (JoSTrans) and Perspectives: Studies in
Translatology were included.

List of the Journals Chosen:

Chosen Target, Translation and Interpreting, the Interpreter and
Translator Trainer, Across Languages and Cultures, Translation Studies, The
Translator, Babel, Translation and Interpreting Studies, New Voices in Translation
 Journal Citations in the Iranian Journal of Translation Studies … 81

Studies, SASKE, Machine Translation, Translation and Literature, TTR, plus Meta,
Perspectives and JoSTrans.

Total citations in each issue of the journal were counted. Then, every instance of
citation to each of the above journals was identified and recorded. Finally, total
citations to all journals in each issue were calculated and compared with the total
citations in the specified issue. The findings were also looked at from a number of
other angles.

4. Results and Discussion

In this part, the findings of the study are presented. These comprise information
regarding the specified journals, their citation distribution and total number of
citations, the correlation between citations with SJR ranking, a comparison between
IF and SJR for a selection of the specified journals and an interpretation of the most
relevant results. Table 1 introduces the journals.
82 Translation Studies, Vol. 14, No. 55, Autumn 2016

Table 1. The International T & I Studies Journals and their Specifications

Impact

ISI Indexed
Journal Title Rank Free/
Factor SJR Publishing
(alphabetically based Open Publishing Country Publisher
2014 or 2016 Since (span)
listed) on SJR Access
2015

Across
0.143 Academia
Languages & 0.366 148 √ Hungary 2000
(2014) Kiado
Cultures
John
Babel 0.082 0.253 199 √ the Netherlands 1955
Benjamins
The Journal of
Roehampton
Specialized √ √ the UK 2004
University
Translation
Machine
0.133 314 the Netherlands Springer 1986
Translation
1955
Meta 0.141 partial √ Canada Erudit 1966 (in
Erudit)
New Voices in
Translation 0.192 239 Ireland IATIS 2011
Studies
Perspectives:
Studies in ∗ √ the UK Routledge 1993
Translatology
The Slovak
Association
for the Study
SASKE Journal of
of English &
Translation and 0.141 299 √ Slovakia 2005
University
Interpretation
Library of
Prešov
University
0.838
John
Target (5-year: 0.641 90 √ the Netherlands 1989
Benjamins
0.542)
The Translator 0.458 0.315 167 √ the UK St. Jerome 1995
University of
Translation and
0.526 107 √ Australia Western 2009
Interpreting
Sydney
Translation and
John
Interpreting 0.185 0.201 226 the Netherlands 2006
Benjamins
Studies
one Edinburgh
Translation and
0.130 324 free Scotland UK University 2006
Literature
issue Press
Translation
0.649 0.319 165 ∗ the UK Routledge 2008
Studies
The Interpreter
and Translator 0.304 0.369 145 ∗ √ the UK Routledge 2007
Trainer
TTR 0.101 473 partial √ Canada Erudit 1988-2012

∗ Recently researchers can choose to get published open access and have access to Open Select journals but
they have to pay a charge.
 Journal Citations in the Iranian Journal of Translation Studies … 83

Table 2. Citations Per International Journals Per Issues of Iranian Journal of Translation
Studies

Journal of
Translator
Perspectiv
Issue No.

Across L.

Citations
Studies
Trainer

SASKE

T & Lit.
Voices

Sp. Tr.
Target

Babel
Meta

Total
Total
New
T&I

T&I

& C.

TTR
T&I
MT

TS

11 2 es 1 1 1 5 116
12 1 1 2 114
13 1 1 151
14 3 2 5 1 11 168
15 0 99
16 1 1 175
17 1 1 2 131
18 4 2 6 170
19 3 2 1 1 7 157
20 1 1 2 98
21 1 3 2 6 132
22 2 3 5 119
23 1 1 133
24 2 2 142
25 2 1 3 6 147
26 5 1 1 2 9 238
27 2 10 4 1 17 157
28 1 1 1 3 6 138
29 2 4 2 8 140
30 4 3 1 8 204
31 1 2 1 8 12 159
32 2 1 7 10 140
33 1 2 7 7 17 227
34 1 1 2 4 142
35 1 2 1 1 4 1 10 180
36 4 3 1 8 165
37 2 1 1 4 212
38 1 1 187
39 1 3 4 192
40 1 9 2 1 13 179
41 1 3 4 2 1 1 12 297
42 2 2 1 4 1 10 159
84 Translation Studies, Vol. 14, No. 55, Autumn 2016

43 1 1 4 1 7 259
44 3 1 4 178
45 4 3 7 156
46 1 2 1 1 1 6 196
47 1 1 1 1 1 5 165
48 1 2 1 1 5 208
49 1 1 249
50 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 9 229
670
Total 3 2 46 1 9 26 1 1 45 1 0 0 81 8 20 8 254
0

Table 2 shows that there are about 38 journal citations per 1000 overall citations,

i.e. around 3.8%. Put differently, each year only 25.6 journal citations to the

journals specified have been made, which is on average about 6 citations per issue.

Consequently, the selected set of journals did not enjoy a wide popularity among

Iranian scholars in the period under investigation. Given the diverse topics and

areas of the field these journals cover, we are driven towards the notion of

accessibility. Without a doubt, part of this low popularity has to do with the authors'

access level. Meta, the journal with the highest citation rate allows partial access to

its issues or articles. This is also true about another highly-cited journal, that is,

Across Languages and Cultures.

It should be noted that the journal issues under investigation in this study cover a

span of 10 years since 2005. Therefore, it is necessary to take into account the

publication period and the publication first-year of the journals to which citations

have been made. This in part accounts for the smaller share of such journals as the

Interpreter and Translator Trainer and Translation and Interpreting in the overall
 Journal Citations in the Iranian Journal of Translation Studies … 85

citations. However, the publication first-year of 10 journals fall behind or is

concurrent with the year 2005, the beginning of the span singled out. Thus, there

should be other factors involved in determining the popularity and citations of

journals. We may ask, for example, why a journal like Translation and Interpreting

that provides users with “open access” has not received a considerable degree of

citations while Target with no free access, is one of the most cited journals. This

leads us to the notions of popularity and citability as governing researchers' citation

behavior ignoring the fact that there are websites and online companies allowing

free or inexpensive access to most journal articles/issues apart from sample

issues/articles the journals themselves occasionally give out. Popularity therefore is

partially determined by quality and one factor contributing to the quality of a

journal is its editorial board. Another factor determining popularity is the age. As

Table 1 and 2 show, there is a direct relationship between the publication age of

the journals and their citation frequency. The top five most cited journals are all 21

to 61 years old.
86 Translation Studies, Vol. 14, No. 55, Autumn 2016

Babel TTR Machine Translation the I & T

TS
8% 3% 1%
0%
Trainer
JoSTrans 1%
Target
3%
18% Perspectives
4%
Meta
32%
the Translator
Translation
10%
and Literature T&I Studies
New Voices in
0% SASKE T&I 0%
TS
0% Across Languages & 0%
0%
Machine Translation the I & T TrainerCultures Target
18%
TS Perspectives the Translator
T&I Studies T&I Across Languages & Cultures
SASKE New Voices in TS Translation and Literature
Meta JoSTrans Babel
TTR
Figure 1. Journals’ Citations Frequency

Figure 1 displays citation frequency for each of the 16 selected journals. About 78%
of all the citations have been made to the four journals of Meta, Target, Across
Languages and Cultures, and the Translator.
 Journal Citations in the Iranian Journal of Translation Studies … 87

Figure 2 Correlations between Citations Frequency and Journals SJR

A comparison between the IF and the citations frequency of the journals was also
made, and its results is presented in Figure 2, which shows that Target with the
highest IF and SJR is the second most cited journal in the articles of the Iranian
Journal of Translation Studies.

The correlation between IF and SJR for the journals both metrics of which were
accessible by the author is provided in Figure 3 below. As demonstrated, Target
enjoys the best ranking assigned by both IF and SJR. Further, the SJR of Target and
Translation Studies is lower than their corresponding IF but other journals' SJR is
higher than their IF. This indicates a general difference in the criteria used by the
two analysis systems and the two metrics. Yet, in terms of the ranking done for the
seven journals compared in this part, three journals show to take close positions in
the two metrics: Target (ranked 1 in both), the Interpreter and Translator Trainer
(ranked 4 by IF and 3 by SJR), and Babel (ranked 7 by IF and 6 by SJR). It would
be interesting to note that 3 out of the 4 most frequently cited journals by the Iranian
88 Translation Studies, Vol. 14, No. 55, Autumn 2016

researchers have high SJR, and Meta is an ISI-indexed and one of the two oldest
journals of its type.

0.838

0.649 0.641

0.458
0.366 0.369
0.304 0.315 0.319
0.253
0.185 0.201
0.143
0.082

Across Languages and Cultures Babel

Target The Translator
Translation and Interpreting Studies Translation Studies
The Interpreter and Translator Trainer

Figure 3 The Correlation between IF and SJR

6. Conclusion
The main objective of this study was to look at the citation behavior of Iranian
scholars with regard to citing a selection of top-ranked international journals of the
field. Moreover, we also aimed at an introduction of the leading journals and their
rankings based on two important metrics as well as bibliometrics as an effective
approach, which offers various metrics and methods for studying different
parameters, in analyzing publications and scholarly behavior. The main advantage
of applying bibliometrics is depicting interests and tendencies of scholars and
consequently how scientific fields evolve at macro scales.

As a result of this research, our hypothesis was to some extent rejected. That is,
accessibility had some connection with popularity in the sense defined here and
hence with citability. Popularity showed to be associated with the quality and the
 Journal Citations in the Iranian Journal of Translation Studies … 89

age of the journals as well. Journals with higher IF/SJR are generally assumed to be
more popular and more frequently accessed by T & I Studies research community
and this was also proved to be true in view of the current study. However, other
factors are at work, too. These, certainly, include the relevance and the quality of
any given article regardless of the journal in which it appears. Finally, ranking
metrics do not necessarily reflect journals' quality as impact and quality are different
concepts.

Wo
Works Ci
Citite
ted
edd
Andrés, A. (2009). Measuring academic research: How to undertake a bibliometric study.
Oxford: Chandos Publishing.

Björneborn, L. & Ingwersen, P. (2001). Perspectives of webometrics. Scientometrics, 50(1),

65—82.

Bradford, S. C. (1934). Sources of information on specific subjects. Engineering, 137, 85—

86.

Chin Roemer, R. & Borchardt, R. (2015). Meaningful metrics: A 21st century librarian’s
guide to bibliometrics, altmetrics, and research impact. Chicago: The Association of

College & Research Libraries.

De Bellis, N. (2009). Bibliometrics and citation analysis: From the science citation index to
cybermetrics. Lanham, Md.: The Scarecrow Press, Inc.

Franco Aixelá, J. (2013). Who’s who and what’s what in translation studies: A preliminary
approach. In C. Way, S. Vandepitte, R. Meylaerts, & M. Bartłomiejczyk (Eds.),
Tracks and treks in translation studies: Selected papers from the EST congress (pp.
7—28). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Grbić, N. (2013). Bibliometrics. In Y. Gambier & L. van Doorslaer (Eds.), Handbook of

translation studies (Vol. 4). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
90 Translation Studies, Vol. 14, No. 55, Autumn 2016

Gile, D. (2000). The history of research into conference interpreting: A scientometric

approach. Target, 12(2), 297—321.

Gile, D. (2006). L’interdisciplinarite en traductologie: Une optique scientometrique. In S.

Ozturk Kasar (Ed.), Interdisciplinarity on translation (Vol. II, pp. 23—37). Istanbul:
Les Editions Isis.

Gross, P. L. K. & Gross, E. M. (1927). College libraries and chemical education. Science,
66 (1713), 385—9.

Hermans, T. (2007). The conference of the tongues. New York: Routledge.

Pöchhacker, F. (1995). Writings and research on interpreting: A bibliographic analysis.

The Interpreters’ Newsletter, 6, 17—31.

Rovira-Esteva, S. & Orero, P. (2011). A contrastive analysis of the main benchmarking

tools for research assessment in translation and interpreting: The Spanish approach.
Perspectives: Studies in Translatology, 19(3), 233—251.

Zhang, M., Pan, H., Chen, X., & Luo, T. (2015). Mapping discourse analysis in translation
studies via bibliometrics: A survey of journal publications. Perspectives: Studies in
Translatology, 23(2), 1—17.