, Volume 89, Issue 1, pp 229–243 | Cite as

Overall prestige of journals with ranking score above a given threshold

  • J. A. García
  • Rosa Rodriguez-Sánchez
  • J. Fdez-Valdivia


Here we show a longitudinal analysis of the overall prestige of first quartile journals during the period between 1999 and 2009, on the subject areas of Scopus. This longitudinal study allows us to analyse developmental trends over times in different subject areas with distinct citation and publication patterns. To this aim, we first introduce an axiomatic index of the overall prestige of journals with ranking score above a given threshold. Here we demonstrate that, between 1999 and 2009, there was high and increasing overall prestige of first quartile journals in only four areas of Scopus. Also, there was high and decreasing overall prestige of first quartile journals in five areas. Two subject areas showed high and oscillating overall prestige of first quartile journals. And there was low and increasing overall prestige in four areas, since the 1999.


Publication analysis First quartile journals Overall prestige Ranking methods Axiomatic index Longitudinal analysis 



This research was sponsored by the Spanish Board for Science and Technology (MICINN) under grant TIN2010-15157 co-financed by European FEDER funds. Thanks are due to the reviewers for their constructive suggestions.


  1. Bergstrom C. (2007). Eigenfactor: Measuring the value and prestige of scholarly journals. College and Research Libraries News, 68(5), 314–316.Google Scholar
  2. Bollen, J., Rodriguez, M.A., & van de Sompel, H. (2006). Journal status. Scientometrics, 69(3), 669–687.Google Scholar
  3. Bornmann, L. (2010). Towards an ideal method of measuring research performance: Some comments to the Opthof and Leydesdorff (2010) paper. Journal of Informetrics, 4(3), 440–443.Google Scholar
  4. Chakravarty, S. R. (1983). A new index of poverty. Mathematical Social Sciences, 6, 307–313.Google Scholar
  5. Garcia, J. A., Rodriguez-Sanchez, R., & Fdez-Valdivia, J. (2011). The prestige gap of journals below a given threshold. The Journal of Informetrics (Submitted).Google Scholar
  6. Garfield E. (2006). The history and meaning of the journal impact factor. JAMA-Journal of the American Medical Association, 295 (1), 90–93.Google Scholar
  7. González-Pereira, B., Guerrero-Bote, V. P., & Moya-Anegón, F., (2010). A new approach to the metric of journals’ scientific prestige: The SJR indicator. Journal of Informetrics, 4(3), 379–391.Google Scholar
  8. Kalaitzidakis, P., Stengos, T., & Mamuneas, T. P. (2003). Rankings of academic journals and institutions in economics. Journal of the European Economic Association, 1(6), 1346–1366.Google Scholar
  9. Kapeller, J. (2010). Some critical notes on citation metrics and heterodox economics. Review of Radical Political Economics, 42(3), 330–337.Google Scholar
  10. Kelchtermans, S., & Veugelers, R. (2011). The great divide in scientific productivity: Why the average scientist does not exist. Industrial and Corporate Change, 20(1), 295–336.Google Scholar
  11. Kodrzycki, Y. K., & Yu, P. (2006). New approaches to ranking economics journals. Contributions to Economic Analysis and Policy, 5(1), Art. 24.Google Scholar
  12. Lee, J., Cassano-Pinche, A., & Vicente, K. J. (2005). Bibliometric analysis of human factors (1970–2000): A quantitative description of scientific impact.Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 47(4), 753–766.Google Scholar
  13. Leydesdorff, L., Moya-Anegón, F., & Guerrero-Bote, V. P. (2010). Journal maps on the basis of Scopus data: A comparison with the journal citation reports of the ISI. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(2), 352–369.Google Scholar
  14. Liebowitz Stanley, J., & Palmer, J. P. (1984). Assessing the relative impacts of economics journals. Journal of Economic Literature, 1, 77–88.Google Scholar
  15. Ma, N., Guan, J., & Zhao, Y. (2008). Bringing PageRank to the citation analysis. Information Processing and Management, 44(2), 800–810.Google Scholar
  16. Merton, R. K. (1968). The Matthew effect in science. Science, 5, 56–63.Google Scholar
  17. Moed, H. F. (2010). CWTS crown indicator measures citation impact of a research group’s publication oeuvre. Journal of Informetrics, 4(3), 436–438.Google Scholar
  18. Opthof, T., & Leydesdorff, L. (2010) Caveats for the journal and field normalizations in the CWTS Leiden evaluations of research performance original research article. Journal of Informetrics, 4(3), 423–430.Google Scholar
  19. Palacios-Huerta I., & Volij O. (2004). The measurement of intellectual influence. Econometrica, 72(3), 963–977.Google Scholar
  20. Peichl, A., Schaefer, T., & Scheicher, C. (2008). Measuring richness and poverty: A micro data application to Europe and Germany. IZA Discussion Paper no. 3790.Google Scholar
  21. Pinski, G., & Narin, F. (1976). Citation influence for journal aggregates of scientific publications. Information Processing and Management, 12, 297–312.Google Scholar
  22. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Podsakoff, N. P., & Bachrach, D. G. (2008). Scholarly influence in the field of management: A bibliometric analysis of the determinants of university and author impact in the management literature in the past Quarter Century. Journal of Management, 34(4), 641–720.Google Scholar
  23. Rousseau, R., & Van Hooydonk, G. (1996). Journal production and journal impact factors. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 47, 775–780.Google Scholar
  24. Rousseau, S., Verbeke, T., & Rousseau, R. (2009). Evaluating environmental and resource economics journals: A TOP-curve approach. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 3(2), 270–287.Google Scholar
  25. SCImago Research Group. SCImago Journal and Country Rank.
  26. Sen, A. (1976). Poverty: An ordinal approach to measurement. Econometrica, 44(2), 219–231.Google Scholar
  27. Spaan, J. A. E. (2010). The danger of pseudoscience in Informetrics. Journal of Informetrics, 4(3), 439–440.Google Scholar
  28. Takayama, N. (1979). Poverty, income inequality, and their measures: Professor Sen’s axiomatic approach reconsidered. Econometrica, 47(3), 747–759.Google Scholar
  29. The Scopus website. Accessed February 2011.
  30. van Raan Anton, F. J. (2004). Measuring science. In: F. Moed Henk, G. Wolfgang, & S. Ulrich (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative science and technology research (pp. 19–50). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  31. van Raan, A. F.J., van Leeuwen, T. N., Visser, M. S., van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Rivals for the crown: Reply to Opthof and Leydesdorff original research article. Journal of Informetrics, 4(3), 431–435.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. A. García
    • 1
  • Rosa Rodriguez-Sánchez
    • 1
  • J. Fdez-Valdivia
    • 1
  1. 1.Departamento de Ciencias de la Computación e I. ACITIC-UGR, Universidad de GranadaGranadaSpain

Personalised recommendations