Beyond the Impact Factor: measuring the international visibility of Romanian social sciences journals

The purpose of this paper is to assess the degree of international visibility for the Romanian scientific social sciences journals included in the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) database. By examining the national distribution of authors and the proportion of co-authorship within and outside Romania, the paper proposes the use of the Theil Index and its decomposition as a tool to assess international visibility. Although there are 10 ISI social sciences journals in Romania, the international visibility of these journals is relatively low; the number of foreign authors as a percentage of the total number of authors remains below 30 % for most journals. There is a high degree of geographic concentration for the foreign authors, as most come from two countries. Regression models also indicate that the number of authors from the same institution as the one that issues the journal affects significantly a journal’s Impact Factor. The number of articles authored exclusively by mixed teams (including authors from the same institution that issues the journal and authors from abroad or authors from other Romanian institutions) as a percentage of the total number of articles published is extremely low (8 %). This suggests that the Impact Factor, when used as a measure of research quality for the Romanian social sciences journals, may create bias in the judgement of those interpreting the results of the Impact Factor rankings, favoring insularity at the expense of scientific collaboration.

[1]  Daniel Teodorescu,et al.  An examination of “citation circles” for social sciences journals in Eastern European countries , 2013, Scientometrics.

[2]  Concepción S. Wilson,et al.  Collaboration in Iranian Scientific Publications , 2002 .

[3]  Ding-wei Huang,et al.  Correlation between impact and collaboration , 2011, Scientometrics.

[4]  Reinhilde Veugelers,et al.  Towards a multipolar science world: trends and impact , 2010, Scientometrics.

[5]  Philip M. Davis Eigenfactor : Does the Principle of Repeated Improvement Result in Better Journal Impact Estimates than Raw Citation Counts? , 2008, ArXiv.

[6]  Tove Faber Frandsen,et al.  Journal self-citations - Analysing the JIF mechanism , 2007, J. Informetrics.

[7]  Sandra Miguel,et al.  What factors affect the visibility of Argentinean publications in humanities and social sciences in Scopus? Some evidence beyond the geographic realm of research , 2014, Scientometrics.

[8]  A. Paraskeva,et al.  Self-citations in six anaesthesia journals and their significance in determining the impact factor. , 2000, British journal of anaesthesia.

[9]  A M Russell,et al.  Science and technology. , 1972, Science.

[10]  J. E. Hirsch,et al.  An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output , 2005, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA.

[11]  M. Way,et al.  The San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment , 2013, Journal of Cell Science.

[12]  Cassidy R. Sugimoto,et al.  Do Altmetrics Work? Twitter and Ten Other Social Web Services , 2013, PloS one.

[13]  Ronald N. Kostoff,et al.  Global nanotechnology research literature overview , 2007 .

[14]  Olle Persson,et al.  The measurement of international scientific collaboration , 1993, Scientometrics.

[15]  Henri Theil,et al.  Economics and information theory , 1967 .

[16]  K. T. Anuradha,et al.  Bibliometric indicators of Indian research collaboration patterns: A correspondence analysis , 2007, Scientometrics.

[17]  Dag W. Aksnes,et al.  Does self-citation pay? , 2007, Scientometrics.

[18]  K. A. McKibbon,et al.  Prediction of citation counts for clinical articles at two years using data available within three weeks of publication: retrospective cohort study , 2008, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[19]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  Double effort = Double impact? A critical view at international co-authorship in chemistry , 2004, Scientometrics.

[20]  Boleslaw K. Szymanski,et al.  An Internet measure of the value of citations , 2012, Inf. Sci..

[21]  T. Braun,et al.  Gatekeeping patterns in the publication of analytical chemistry research. , 1983, Talanta.

[22]  Bárbara S. Lancho-Barrantes,et al.  Citation flows in the zones of influence of scientific collaborations , 2012, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[23]  Luis Roman Carrasco,et al.  Extreme inequalities of citation counts in environmental sciences , 2014 .

[24]  H. Broding,et al.  RETROSPECTIVE COHORT STUDY IN BAKERS AND FARMERS , 2011 .

[25]  Radhamany Sooryamoorthy,et al.  Collaboration and publication: How collaborative are scientists in South Africa? , 2009, Scientometrics.

[26]  S. Sala,et al.  The impact of self-citation , 2010, Cortex.

[27]  P. S. Nagpaul Transnational linkages of Indian science: A structural analysis , 1999, Scientometrics.

[28]  Jiancheng Guan,et al.  China's emerging presence in nanoscience and nanotechnology: A comparative bibliometric study of several nanoscience ‘giants’ , 2007 .

[29]  Ki-Wan Kim,et al.  Measuring international research collaboration of peripheral countries: Taking the context into consideration , 2006, Scientometrics.

[30]  Peter Ingwersen,et al.  Online citation analysis , 1996, Scientometrics.

[31]  S. Rijcke,et al.  Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics , 2015, Nature.

[32]  J. Koricheva,et al.  What determines the citation frequency of ecological papers? , 2005, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[33]  Michel Zitt,et al.  Internationalization of scientific journals: A measurement based on publication and citation scope , 2006, Scientometrics.

[34]  Nabil Amara,et al.  The impact of transaction costs on the institutional structuration of collaborative academic research , 1998 .

[35]  Koenraad Debackere,et al.  A concise review on the role of author self-citations in information science, bibliometrics and science policy , 2006, Scientometrics.

[36]  魏屹东,et al.  Scientometrics , 2018, Encyclopedia of Big Data.

[37]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  A distributional approach to multinationality measures of international scientific collaboration , 2004, Scientometrics.

[38]  Philip M. Davis Eigenfactor: Does the principle of repeated improvement result in better estimates than raw citation counts? , 2008 .