Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Impact factors, scientometrics and the history of citation-based research

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Few contemporary inventions have influenced academic publishing as much as journal impact factors. On the other hand, debates and discussion on the potential limitations of, and appropriate uses for, journal performance indicators are almost as long as the history of the measures themselves. Given that scientometrics is often undertaken using bibliometric techniques, the history of the former is inextricably linked to the latter. As with any controversy it is difficult to separate an invention from its history, and for these reasons, the current article provides an overview of some key historical events of relevance to the impact factor. When he first proposed the concept over half a century ago, Garfield did not realise that impact factors would one day become the subject of such widespread controversy. As the current Special Issue of Scientometrics suggests, this debate continues today.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adair, W. C. (1955). Citation indexes for scientific literature? American Documentation, 6, 31–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Althouse, B. M., West, J. D., et al. (2009). Differences in impact factor across fields and over time. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(1), 27–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Archambault, É., & Larivière, V. (2009). History of the journal impact factor: Contingencies and consequences. Scientometrics, 79(3), 635–649.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • A.W.P. (1914). The Panizzi club. The Library, 10, 95–102.

  • Bonitz, M. (2001). About the nalimov memorial issue of the journal scientometrics. Scientometrics, 52(2), 107–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradford, S. C. (1934). Sources of information on specific subjects. Engineering, 137, 85–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braun, T. (2001a). Editorial. Scientometrics, 52(2), 101.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Braun, T. (2001b). V.V. Nalimov’s foreword to the Hungarian edition. Scientometrics, 52(2), 102–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braun, T., & Glanzel, W. (1995). The sweet and sour of journal citation rates. Chemical Intelligencer, 1(1), 31–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brodman, E. (1944). Choosing physiology journals. Bulletin Medical Library Association, 32, 479–483.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, H. (2007). How impact factors changed medical publishing—and science. BMJ, 334(7593), 561–564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bush, V. (1945). As we may think. The Atlantic Monthly, 176(1), 101–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cawkell, A. E. (1978). Evaluating scientific journals with journal citation reports—A case study in acoustics. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 29(1), 41–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chung, K. H., & Cox, R. A. K. (1990). Patterns of productivity in the finance literature: A study of the bibliometric distributions. The Journal of Finance, 45(1), 301–309.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole, F. J., & Eales, N. B. (1917). The history of comparative anatomy. Part 1—A statistical analysis of the literature. Science Progress, 11, 578–596.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coronado, R. A., Riddle, D. L., et al. (2011). Bibliometric analysis of articles published from 1980 to 2009 in Physical Therapy, journal of the American Physical Therapy Association. Physical Therapy, 91(5), 642–655.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crookes, P. A., Reis, S. L., et al. (2009). The development of a ranking tool for refereed journals in which nursing and midwifery researchers publish their work. Nurse Education Today, 30(5), 420–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dul, J., & Karwowski, W. (2004). An assessment system for rating scientific journals in the field of ergonomics and human factors. Applied Ergonomics, 35(3), 301–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dul, J., Karwowski, W., et al. (2005). Technical note: objective and subjective rankings of scientific journals in the field of ergonomics: 2004–2005. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing, 15, 327–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elkins, M., Maher, C., et al. (2010). Correlation between the journal impact factor and three other journal citation indices. Scientometrics, 85(1), 81–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garfield, E. (1955). Citation indexes for science: A new dimension in documentation through association of ideas. Science, 122(3159), 108–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garfield, E. (1970). Citation indexing for studying science. Nature, 227(5259), 669–671.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garfield, E. (1976). Introducing journal citation reports. Essays of an Information Scientist, 2, 556–557.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garfield, E. (1980). Bradford’s law and related statistical patterns. Current Contents, 19, 476–483.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garfield, E. (1986). Which medical journals have the greatest impact? Annals of Internal Medicine, 105(2), 313–320.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garfield, E. (1999). Journal impact factor: a brief review. CMAJ, 161, 979–980.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garfield, E. (2006). The history and meaning of the journal impact factor. JAMA, 295(1), 90–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garfield, E. (2007a). The evolution of the science citation index. International Microbiology, 10(1), 65–69.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Garfield, E. (2007). From the science of science to scientometrics: Visualising the history of science with HistCite software. In D. Torres-Salinas and H. F. Moed (Eds.), 11th International Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, Madrid (pp. 21–26). Madrid.

  • Garfield, E. (2012). Website of Eugene Garfield, Ph.D. Retrieved January 24, 2012, from http://www.garfield.library.upenn.edu/.

  • Glänzel, W. (2009). The multi-dimensionality of journal impact. Scientometrics, 78(2), 355–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glänzel, W., & Moed, H. (2002). Journal impact measures in bibliometric research. Scientometrics, 53(2), 171–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gravell, F. W. (1954). E.W. Hulme. Obituary notice. Library Association Record, 56(12), 500.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gross, P. L. K., & Gross, E. M. (1927). College libraries and chemical education. Science, 66, 385–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 102(46), 16569–16572.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hood, W., & Wilson, C. (2001). The literature of bibliometrics, scientometrics, and informetrics. Scientometrics, 52(2), 291–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hulme, E. W. (1923). Statistical bibliography in relation to the growth of modern civilization. London: Butler & Tanner.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hulme, E. W. (1925). Catalogue of scientific papers. Nature, 116(2908), 129–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutton, R. S. (1961). Journal of Documentation, 17(1), 3–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ketefian, S., & Dai, Y. T. (2010). Environment for nursing scholarship and journal impact factors in Taiwan. Nurs Health Sci, 12(2), 191–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehmann, S., Jackson, A. D., et al. (2006). Measures for measures. Nature, 444(7122), 1003–1004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L. (2002). Indicators of structural change in the dynamics of science: Entropy statistics of the SCI journal citation reports. Scientometrics, 53(1), 131–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lotka, A. J. (1926). The frequency distribution of scientific productivity. Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences, 16(12), 317–324.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mogil, J. S., Simmonds, K., et al. (2009). Pain research from 1975 to 2007: a categorical and bibliometric meta-trend analysis of every research paper published in the journal, Pain. Pain, 142(1–2), 48–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ogden, T. L., & Bartley, D. L. (2008). The ups and downs of journal impact factors. Annals of Occupational Hygiene, 52(2), 73–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Price, D. D. S. (1963). Little science, big science. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Price, D. D. S. (1965). Networks of scientific papers. Science, 149, 510–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Price, D. D. S. (1976). A general theory of bibliometric and other cumulative advantage processes. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 27(5), 292–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Price, D. D. S. (1978). Editorial statements. Scientometrics, 1(1), 3–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pritchard, A. (1969). Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics? Journal of Documentation, 25(4), 348–349.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, R. (2012). Updating the journal impact factor or total overhaul? Scientometrics, 1–5. doi:10.1007/s11192-012-0649-1.

  • Seringhaus, M. R., & Gerstein, M. B. (2007). Publishing perishing? Towards tomorrow’s information architecture. BMC Bioinformatics, 8, 17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, F. R. (1991). The most-cited articles from the Yale Law Journal. The Yale Law Journal, 100(5), 1449–1514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, F. R. (1992). Origins of bibliometrics, citation indexing, and citation analysis: The neglected legal literature. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 43(5), 337–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D. R. (2007). Historical development of the journal impact factor and its relevance for occupational health. Industrial Health, 45(6), 730–742.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D. R. (2008). Citation analysis and impact factor trends of 5 core journals in occupational medicine, 1985–2006. Archives of Environmental & Occupational Health, 63(3), 114–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D. R. (2009). Historical development of the Archives of Environmental & Occupational Health and its predecessor journals, 1919–2009. Archives of Environmental & Occupational Health, 64(Suppl), 18–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D. R. (2010a). Identifying a set of ‘core’ journals in occupational health, part 1: Lists proposed by others. Archives of Environmental & Occupational Health, 65(2), 106–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D. R. (2010b). Identifying a set of ‘core’ journals in occupational health, part 2: Lists derived by bibliometric techniques. Archives of Environmental & Occupational Health, 65(3), 173–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D. R. (2010c). A longitudinal analysis of bibliometric and impact factor trends among the core international journals of nursing, 1977–2008. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 47(12), 1491–1499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D. R. (2010d). Citation analysis and impact factor trends in the Ergonomics Journal list, 1975–2007. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 20(1), 87–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D. R., & Hazelton, M. (2011). Bibliometric awareness in nursing scholarship: Can we afford to ignore it any longer? Nursing & Health Sciences, 13(4), 384–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D. R., & Rivett, D. A. (2009). Bibliometrics, impact factors and manual therapy: Balancing the science and the art. Manual Therapy, 14(4), 456–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taber, D. F. (2005). Quantifying publication impact. Science, 309(5744), 2166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Takahashi, K., Hoshuyama, T., et al. (1996). A bibliometric study of the trend in articles related to epidemiology published in occupational health journals. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 53(7), 433–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, A. M. (1993). Vasily Vasilyevich Nalimov. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 33(3), 82–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turale, S. (2010). Progress in scholarly journal publications. Nursing & Health Sciences, 12(4), 399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanclay, J. (2009). Bias in the journal impact factor. Scientometrics, 78(1), 3–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanclay, J. (2012). Impact factor: outdated artefact or stepping-stone to journal certification? Scientometrics, 1–28. doi:10.1007/s11192-011-0561-0.

  • Weinberg, B. H. (1997). The earliest Hebrew citation indexes. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48(4), 318–330.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Weinberg, B. H. (1999). Indexes and religion: Reflections on research in the history of indexes. The Indexer, 21(3), 111–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinberg, B. H. (2000a). Who invented the index?—An agenda for research on information access features of Hebrew and Latin manuscripts. Retrieved January 13, 2012, from http://archive.ifla.org/IV/ifla66/papers/081-174e.htm.

  • Weinberg, B. H. (2000b). Book indexes in France. Medieval specimens and modern practices. The Indexer, 22(1), 2–13.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Wiles, L., Olds, T., et al. (2010). Evidence base, quantitation and collaboration: three novel indices for bibliometric content analysis. Scientometrics, 85(1), 317–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zipf, G. K. (1949). Human behavior and the principle of least effort. Cambridge: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health, University of Newcastle, Ourimbah, NSW, 2258, Australia

    Derek R. Smith

Authors
  1. Derek R. Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Derek R. Smith.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Smith, D.R. Impact factors, scientometrics and the history of citation-based research. Scientometrics 92, 419–427 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0685-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0685-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation