162:, may be notable if it has attracted sufficient notoriety. High quality scholarly journals are rarely controversial, and so may be boring as subjects for Knowledge (XXG) articles, yet they are important for their publication of reliable sources. Helping users locate journal metadata (information about the journal) is part of helping them to make their own assessment of the reliability of content in those journals and hence to
158:(e.g., doubled square brackets ] are put around the journal name). If the scholarly journal is widely used within Knowledge (XXG) as a source in articles, then for utilitarian reasons that should be taken into account in determining whether Knowledge (XXG) should have at least a stub article on the journal in order to provide more information to users about the cited reference. Even a low-quality publication, such as
190:
orthopedics is around 1. The average impact factor environmental studies and law is around 1.5. The average impact factor for physics, pathology, ophthalmology, and medical imaging is around 2. The average impact factor for general medicine and neuroscience is around 3. The only fields with an average impact factor above 4 are astronomy and molecular and cell biology.
24:
189:
In particular, citation patterns, and therefore impact factors, differ significantly across academic disciplines. The average impact factor for fields such as mathematics, history, and education is around 0.5. The average impact factor for information science, business, crop science, dentistry, and
251:
Remember: Even the most prestigious and highly reputable journals have published embarrassingly bad papers, and many disreputable journals have published good quality papers by reputable researchers. Finding journals with good reputations is only part of the work in deciding what sources to use
222:
Other metrics take these patterns into account, and journal rankings within a field can be particularly useful. A journal that ranks near the middle of its field (or higher) is almost always going to be an acceptable journal. Journals that rank towards the bottom of their field may have quality
193:
This doesn't mean that MCB journals are eight times better than mathematics and history journals, or that general medicine is three times better than orthopedic surgery. It only means that mathematicians and historians generally find it necessary to cite fewer journal articles in each paper than
123:
standards for such publications should be relatively inclusive, even if the journal is a new startup, and even if the organisation or company responsible for the publication are the (main) writers and editors of the article, maintaining of course the usual behavioural standards set in
207:
the journal publishes deliberately provocative papers, in the expectation that they will be cited repeatedly by authors who want to disagree or object to the paper. This causes the impact factor to rise, because all citations are treated
83:
on
Knowledge (XXG), particularly for new concepts or cutting-edge research that may not yet appear in textbooks. There is serious disagreement among scholars about the validity and/or applicability of measurements such as the
247:
and searching for the journal you want to review. (For these metrics, bigger numbers are better, so a journal with a CiteScore percentile of 60% is cited more often than 60% of journals in that subject area.)
214:
authors think their articles are more likely to be accepted if they sprinkle needless citations to previous publications by possible reviewers, or to previous publications in the journal they submit the paper
201:
the journal focuses on general subjects (e.g., medicine) instead of niche specialties (e.g., orthopedics) or region-specific information (e.g., agricultural research or law in a specific country)
178:. Even the best physics journal is an unreliable source for statements about politics, and top-quality political journals are poor sources for statements about physics.
378:
154:
Knowledge (XXG) articles are largely built on inline references that cite to journals, etc. In the
Knowledge (XXG) citation, the name of the journal often is
186:
An impact factor measures how many times a journal's articles are cited in other journal articles. There is no "magic" or "good" number for impact factors.
317:
218:
the journal publishes in a field that uses journal articles as their primary official communication (e.g., biology), rather than books (e.g., history).
336:
Althouse, Benjamin M.; West, Jevin D.; Bergstrom, Carl T.; Bergstrom, Theodore (2009). "Differences in impact factor across fields and over time".
211:
articles accepted by the journal tend to have more authors than average (which means more people who will cite that article in their future work)
235:
This free service allows you to put in the subject area of research (e.g., genetics) and see a list of ranked journals. You can also check the
322:
244:
43:
It contains the advice or opinions of one or more
Knowledge (XXG) contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of
44:
104:
The journal's impact factor is not a decisive factor on whether it should be the subject of a standalone article in
Knowledge (XXG).
79:
Independent, peer-reviewed publications such as academic journals or specialist trade magazines are important places to find
223:
problems, or there may be factors irrelevant to quality that lower their ranking (such as not publishing in
English).
174:
There are multiple metrics for evaluating whether a journal is reputable. The most important factor, as always, is
163:
36:
85:
175:
143:
the journal in other independent journals, or as citations are found by the usual searches, particularly
48:
58:
240:
159:
96:
calculated for academic journals to gauge how often a journal's articles are independently cited.
32:
345:
131:
Editors should be able to establish notability of these journals based on adequate citations in
300:
355:
291:
281:
125:
108:
107:
Sometimes an article about a scholarly journal or specialist trade magazine will appear at
132:
80:
270:"Use of the Journal Impact Factor in academic review, promotion, and tenure evaluations"
295:
269:
155:
120:
116:
372:
93:
89:
286:
51:. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.
148:
243:("prestige") of any already-cited journal by switching the search to title or
236:
303:
359:
338:
Journal of the
American Society for Information Science and Technology
204:
the journal publishes in a (currently) fashionable or well-funded area
350:
144:
232:
18:
323:
Knowledge (XXG):Notability (periodicals)#Academic journals
166:
statements for which our articles cite them in support.
231:
For scientific journals, you can find good journals at
66:
261:
111:. Users citing this page believe there should be a
264:(San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment)
115:such articles provided they can be established as
119:and independent. In other words, we believe the
318:Knowledge (XXG):Notability (academic journals)
170:Deciding whether the journal is a good source
8:
197:In general, impact factors are higher if:
349:
294:
285:
45:Knowledge (XXG)'s policies or guidelines
379:Knowledge (XXG) essays about notability
328:
176:whether the source fits the statement
7:
139:the journal as well as references
49:thoroughly vetted by the community
14:
268:McKiernan, Erin C. (2019-04-09).
100:Notability of individual journals
252:when you are building articles.
22:
16:Essay on editing Knowledge (XXG)
287:10.7287/peerj.preprints.27638v2
233:https://www.scopus.com/sources
1:
395:
227:Searching for good sources
56:
135:from articles published
86:Science Citation Index
156:internally wikilinked
109:Articles for Deletion
47:, as it has not been
241:SCImago Journal Rank
160:Homeopathy (journal)
262:https://sfdora.org/
113:presumption to keep
360:10.1002/asi.20936
77:
76:
386:
364:
363:
353:
333:
307:
298:
289:
239:percentiles and
133:reliable sources
81:reliable sources
69:
26:
25:
19:
394:
393:
389:
388:
387:
385:
384:
383:
369:
368:
367:
335:
334:
330:
314:
267:
258:
256:Further reading
229:
184:
182:No magic number
172:
102:
73:
72:
65:
61:
53:
52:
23:
17:
12:
11:
5:
392:
390:
382:
381:
371:
370:
366:
365:
327:
326:
325:
320:
313:
310:
309:
308:
265:
257:
254:
228:
225:
220:
219:
216:
212:
209:
205:
202:
183:
180:
171:
168:
101:
98:
88:(SCIndex) and
75:
74:
71:
70:
62:
57:
54:
42:
41:
29:
27:
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
391:
380:
377:
376:
374:
361:
357:
352:
347:
343:
339:
332:
329:
324:
321:
319:
316:
315:
311:
305:
302:
297:
293:
288:
283:
279:
275:
271:
266:
263:
260:
259:
255:
253:
249:
246:
242:
238:
234:
226:
224:
217:
213:
210:
206:
203:
200:
199:
198:
195:
191:
187:
181:
179:
177:
169:
167:
165:
161:
157:
152:
150:
146:
142:
138:
134:
129:
127:
122:
118:
114:
110:
105:
99:
97:
95:
94:bibliometrics
91:
90:Impact Factor
87:
82:
68:
64:
63:
60:
55:
50:
46:
40:
38:
34:
28:
21:
20:
344:(1): 27–34.
341:
337:
331:
277:
273:
250:
230:
221:
196:
194:biologists.
192:
188:
185:
173:
153:
151:or Scholar.
149:Google Books
140:
136:
130:
112:
106:
103:
78:
30:
31:This is an
121:notability
117:verifiable
92:which are
37:notability
351:0804.3116
237:CiteScore
373:Category
312:See also
304:31364991
208:equally.
59:Shortcut
296:6668985
164:verify
126:WP:COI
346:arXiv
274:eLife
145:JSTOR
67:WP:SJ
33:essay
301:PMID
245:ISSN
356:doi
292:PMC
282:doi
35:on
375::
354:.
342:60
340:.
299:.
290:.
280:.
276:.
272:.
215:to
147:,
141:to
137:in
128:.
362:.
358::
348::
306:.
284::
278:8
39:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.