Discipline Impact Factor: Some of Its History, Some of the Author’s Experience of Its Application, the Continuing Reasons for Its Use and… Next Beyond

doi:10.2478/jdis-2020-0015

Abstract

Abstract:

Purpose: This work aims to consider the role and some of the 42-year history of the discipline impact factor (DIF) in evaluation of serial publications. Also, the original “symmetric” indicator called the “discipline susceptibility factor” is to be presented.

Design/methodology/approach: In accordance with the purpose of the work, the methods are analytical interpretation of the scientific literature related to this problem as well as speculative explanations. The information base of the research is bibliometric publications dealing with impact, impact factor, discipline impact factor, and discipline susceptibility factor.

Findings: Examples of the DIF application and modification of the indicator are given. It is shown why research and university libraries need to use the DIF to evaluate serials in conditions of scarce funding for subscription to serial publications, even if open access is available. The role of the DIF for evaluating journals by authors of scientific papers when choosing a good and right journal for submitting a paper is also briefly discussed. An original indicator “symmetrical” to the DIF (the “discipline susceptibility factor”) and its differences from the DIF in terms of content and purpose of evaluation are also briefly presented.

Research limitations: The selection of publications for the information base of the research did not include those in which the DIF was only mentioned, used partially or not for its original purpose. Restrictions on the length of the article to be submitted in this special issue of the JDIS also caused exclusion even a number of completely relevant publications. Consideration of the DIF is not placed in the context of describing other derivatives from the Garfield impact factor.

Practical implications: An underrated bibliometric indicator, viz. the discipline impact factor is being promoted for the practical application. An original indicator “symmetrical” to DIF has been proposed in order of searching serial publications representing the external research fields that might fit for potential applications of the results of scientific activities obtained within the framework of the specific research field represented by the cited specialized journals. Both can be useful in research and university libraries in their endeavors to improve scientific information services. Also, both can be used for evaluating journals by authors of scientific papers when choosing a journal to submit a paper.

Originality/value: The article substantiates the need to evaluate scientific serial publications in library activities—even in conditions of access to huge and convenient databases (subscription packages) and open access to a large number of serial publications. It gives a mini-survey of the history of one of the methods of such evaluation, and offers an original method for evaluating scientific serial publications.

Key words: Discipline impact factor, Discipline susceptibility factor, Citation analysis, Journals evaluation, Serials evaluation, Information service

S. Lazarev, Vladimir. "Discipline Impact Factor: Some of Its History, Some of the Author’s Experience of Its Application, the Continuing Reasons for Its Use and… Next Beyond." Journal of Data and Information Science, vol.5, no.3, 2020, pp.197-209. DOI: 10.2478/jdis-2020-0015

References 38

1	Bensman S.J . ( 2007). Garfield and the impact factor. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 41( 1), 93-155. doi: 10.1002/aris.2007.1440410110
2	Black Jr.G.W . ( 1983). Core journal lists for behaviorally disordered children. Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian, 3(1), 31-38. doi: 10.1300/J103v03n01_04
3	Bornmann L . ( 2014). Is there currently a scientific revolution in scientometrics? Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(3), 647-648. doi: 10.1002/asi.23073
4	Cole S., & Cole J.R . ( 1967). Scientific output and recognition: A study in the operation of the reward system in science. American Sociological Review, 32(3), 377-390. pmid: 6046811
5	Garfield E . ( 1955). Citation indexes for science: A new dimension in documentation through association of ideas. Science, 122(3159), 108-111. doi: 10.1126/science.122.3159.108 doi: 10.1126/science.122.3159.108 pmid: 14385826
6	Garfield E., & Malin M.E . (1968). Can Nobel Prize winners be predicted? Paper presented at 135th Annual Meeting, American Association for the Advancement of Science, Dallas, Texas, December 26-31, S.l. Retrieved from http://www.garfield.library.upenn.edu/papers/nobelpredicted.pdf.
7	Garfield E . ( 1970). What is a significant journal? Current Contents, ( 18), 5-6.
8	Garfield E . ( 1972). Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation. Science, 178(4060), 471-479. doi: 10.1126/science.178.4060.471 pmid: 5079701
9	Garfield E . (1982a). Journal Citation Studies. 35. Veterinary journals: What they cite and vice versa. Current Contents, (13), 5-13. Retrieved from http://www.garfield.library.upenn.edu/essays/v5p464y1981-82.pdf.
10	Garfield E . ( 1982b). Journal Citation Studies. 39. Earth sciences journals: What they cite and what cites them. Current Contents, (52), 5-14. Retrieved from http://www.garfield.library.upenn.edu/essays/v5p791y1981-82.pdf.
11	Garfield E . ( 2003) Quality of impact factor of general medical journals—PRADVA wins hands down. Retrieved from http://garfield.library.upenn.edu/papers/bmjfeb192003.html.
12	Gould A.L . ( 1981). Verifying a citation: Reference use of OCLC and RLIN. Reference Services Review, 9(4), 51-60. doi: 10.1108/eb048731
13	Gove P.B ., Ed. ( 1993). Webster’s third new international dictionary of the english language. Unabridged. Utilizing all the experience and resources of more than one hundred years of Merriam-Webster dictionaries. Cologne, Köneman.
14	Hirst G., & Talent N . ( 1977). Computer science journals—an iterated citation analysis. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication. PC- 20(4), 233-238.
15	Hirst G . ( 1978). Discipline impact factor—a method for determining core journal list. Journal of American Society for Information Science, 29(4), 171-172. doi: 10.1002/asi.4630290403
16	ISO 5127:2017 (en): Information and documentation—Foundation and vocabulary. In ISO Online Browsing Platform (OBP)(Entry 3.10.3.10). Retrieved from https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#search.
17	Korennoi A.A., & Osetrov V.D . ( 1981). Citation networks of scientific journals as information models of intra- and inter-scientific communications. Nauchno-tekhnicheskaya informatsiya [Scientific and Technical Information], Ser. 1, (10), 26-30. (in Russian)
18	Kurtz M.J., & Bollen J . ( 2010) Usage bibliometrics. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 44(1), 3-64. doi: 10.1002/aris.2010.1440440108.
19	Kushkowski J.D., Gerhard K.H., & Dobson C . ( 1998). A method for building core journals lists in interdisciplinary subject areas. Journal of Documentation, 54(4), 477-488. doi: 10.1108/eum0000000007179
20	Lazarev V.S., & Nikolaichik V.V . ( 1979). Distribution of information on hematology in scientific journals. In Sovremennye aspekty gematologii [Modern aspects of hematology] (pp. 128-133). Minsk, Nauka i tekhnika Publ. (in Russian)
21	Lazarev V.S . ( 1980). Perfection of information service of coagulation researchers . In 1 Ukrainskii s”ezd gematologov i transfuziologov (10—12 dekabrya 1980 g., Khar’kov): tezisy dokladov [1^st Ukrainian congress of hematologists and transfusiologists: abstracts (December 10-12, 1980, at Kharkov)]. (pp. 20-21). Kiev. (in Russian)
22	Lazarev V.S . ( 1988). The study of the thematic structure of documentary flows for management decision-making on the organization of scientific medical research. In Puti povysheniya effektivnosti ispol’zovaniya nauchno-informatsionnogo potentsiala meditsinskoi nauki i prakticheskogo zdravookhraneniya: tez. Resp. nauch. konf. (g. Poltava, 15-16 sentyabrya 1988 g.) [“Ways to improve the efficiency of scientific and information potential of medical science and practical health”: Abstracts of the Republican scientific conference (Poltava City, Sept. 15—16, 1998)] (pp. 75-77). Kiev. (in Russian).
23	Lazarev V.S . ( 1996). On chaos in bibliometric terminology. Scientometrics, 35(2), 271-277. doi: 10.1007/BF02018485
24	Lazarev V.S . ( 1998). On the role of bibliometrics in the knowledge society: Bibliometric quicksand or bibliometric challenge? Newsletter to European Health Librarians, (44), 17-18. Retrieved from https://rep.bntu.by/bitstream/handle/data/25422/17%e2%80%9318.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.
25	Lazarev V.S., & Skalaban A.V . ( 2016). The world major scientific periodicals to be used by researchers of renewable energy, local and secondary energy resources. Energetika. Proceedings of CIS Higher Education Institutions and Power Engineering Associations, 59(5), 488-502(in Russian, with English abstract). doi: 10.21122/1029-7448-2016-59-5-488-502
26	Lazarev V.S., Skalaban A.V., Yurik I.V., Lis P.A., & Kachan D.A . ( 2017). Selection of serial periodicals to support researchers (based on the example of scientific work on nuclear power). Scientific and Technical Information Processing, 44(3), 196-206. doi: 10.3103/s0147688 217030066
27	Lazarev V.S., & Yurik I.V . ( 2018). Selection of periodicals to support nanotechnology research. Scientific and Technical Information Processing, 45(2), 87-99. doi: 10.3103/S01476882 18020065
28	Lazarev V.S . ( 2019a). Insufficient definitions or a vaguely grasped notion? On definitions of “impact”. Scholarly Research and Information, 2(1), 63-78. doi: 10.24108/2658-3143-2019-2-1-63-78 (in Russian, with English synopsis)
29	Lazarev V.S . ( 2019b). The property that is factually being evaluated when they say they evaluate Impact. Scholarly Research and Information, 2(2), 129-138. https://doi.org/10.24108/2658-3143-2019-2-2-129-138 (in Russian, with English synopsis)
30	Lazarev V.S ( . ( 2019c). On the possibilities of evaluating properties of scientific documents on the basis of their citations count (Or again: What property is reflected by citations count par excellence, after all?). Part 1: Value. University Library at a New Stage of Social Communications Development. Conference Proceedings, (4), 28-36. doi: https://doi.org/10.15802/unilib/2019_187405. Retrieved from http://unilibnsd.diit.edu.ua/article/view/187405.
31	Lazarev V.S., Yurik I.V., Lis P.A., Kachan D.A., & Dydik N.S . ( 2019). Some methodological aspects of selection serials to be included in the information environment for researchers in a technical or natural science (by example of optoelectronics and optical systems), Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal), 2185. Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/2185.
32	MacRoberts M.H., & MacRoberts B.R . ( 1996). Problems of citation analysis. Scientometrics, 36(3), 435-444. doi: 10.1007/BF02129604
33	Markusova V.A . ( 1973). On the formal method of assessing the importance of journals. Nauchno-tekhnicheskaya informatsiya [Scientific and Technical Information], Ser. 1, ( 10), 8-18. (in Russian)
34	Nicolaisen J . ( 2007). Citation analysis. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 41(1), 609-641. doi: 10.1002/aris.2007.1440410120
35	Patton R.M., Stahl C.G., & Wells J.C. (2016). Measuring scientific impact beyond citation counts. D-Lib Magazine, 22(9/10). doi: 10.10.1045/september2016-patton. Retrieved from http://www.dlib.org/dlib/september16/patton/09patton.html
36	Price D.J. de S . (1970). Citation measures of hard science, soft science, technology and nonscience, in Nelson, C.E., Pollock, D.K. (Eds.). Communication among Scientists and Engineers. Lexington, Mass.: Heath Lexington, 1970, 3-22.
37	Waltman L., van Eck N.J., & Wouters P . ( 2013). Counting publications and citations: Is more always better? Journal of Informetrics, 7(3), 635-641. doi: 10.1016/j.joi.2013.04.001
38	Yan E.J., & Zhu Y . ( 2015). Identifying entities from scientific publications: A comparison of vocabulary and model-based methods. Journal of Informetrics, 9(3), 455-465. doi: 10.1016/j.joi.2015.04.003 doi: 10.1016/j.joi.2015.04.003

[1]	Cinzia Daraio, Renato Bruni, Giuseppe Catalano, Alessandro Daraio, Giorgio Matteucci, Monica Scannapieco, Daniel Wagner-Schuster, Benedetto Lepori. A Tailor-made Data Quality Approach for Higher Educational Data [J]. Journal of Data and Information Science, 2020, 5(3): 129-160.
[2]	Lawrence Smolinsky, Aaron J Lercher. Co-author Weighting in Bibliometric Methodology and Subfields of a Scientific Discipline [J]. Journal of Data and Information Science, 2020, 5(3): 84-96.
[3]	Kayvan Kousha, Mike Thelwall. An Automatic Method to Identify Citations to Journals in News Stories: A Case Study of UK Newspapers Citing Web of Science Journals [J]. Journal of Data and Information Science, 2019, 4(3): 73-95.
[4]	Carlos Luis González-Valiente, Magda León Santos, Ricardo Arencibia-Jorge. Evolution of the Socio-cognitive Structure of Knowledge Management (1986-2015): An Author Co-citation Analysis [J]. Journal of Data and Information Science, 2019, 4(2): 36-55.
[5]	Liang Guoqiang, Hou Haiyan, Hu Zhigang, Huang Fu, Wang Yajie, Zhang Shanshan. Usage Count: A New Indicator to Detect Research Fronts [J]. Journal of Data and Information Science, 2017, 2(1): 89-104.
[6]	Zhao Dangzhi, Cappello Alicia, Johnston Lucinda. Functions of Uni- and Multi-citations: Implications for Weighted Citation Analysis [J]. Journal of Data and Information Science, 2017, 2(1): 51-69.
[7]	Ping JIA, Yue YOU, Zhuang LI, Wenjiao GUO, Huifang XU, Wanyu ZHAO & Lu DONG. A new service model of document and information sharing among consortium members: The collaborative innovation practice of the NSLC and PASs [J]. Journal of Data and Information Science, 2015, 7(4): 2-17.
[8]	Xiwen LIU, Yuling SUN, Ping JIA, Fang CHEN, Hao PENG, Yafei YAN, Lu DONG, Xiaoli CHEN, Shushu CHEN, Wenjiao GUO, Zhuang LI. Special library services for regional economic development (SRED) —Practice of the NSLC [J]. Journal of Data and Information Science, 2015, 7(3): 3-21.
[9]	Hanhua WU. A study on Chinese independent libraries’ capabilities to provide ICT-based service [J]. Journal of Data and Information Science, 2014, 7(2): 82-96.
[10]	Ran ZHENG & Ximing XIAO. A survey of public needs for digital information service in libraries and museums [J]. Journal of Data and Information Science, 2014, 7(2): 55-64.
[11]	Fei ZHENG,Hao PENG,Fang CHEN,Hualing XIE,Yuling SUN. Library's industrial technology information service in science parks—Taking NSL's practice as an example [J]. Journal of Data and Information Science, 2014, 7(1): 84-97.
[12]	Yunpeng QU,Huiwei LIANG,Lei SA,Yumei XU,Wenjie DUN,Rongrong ZHAO,Qiuhui CHEN. A survey of public needs for government information service in libraries [J]. Journal of Data and Information Science, 2014, 7(1): 46-56.
[13]	Xiaoxia YAO*, Ling CHEN & Qiang ZHU. CALIS service framework and its implementation [J]. Journal of Data and Information Science, 2011, 4(3/4): 12-23.
[14]	Jian DU, Bin ZHANG, Yang LI, Xiaoli TANG & Peiyang XU. A causational analysis of scholars' years of active academic careers vis-à-vis their academic productivity and academic influence [J]. Journal of Data and Information Science, 2011, 4(2): 77-91.
[15]	Lei LIU, Yinghua FENG & Yi JIANG. The college students' response to customized information services based on Library2.0 technologies at universities in Nanjing [J]. Journal of Data and Information Science, 2011, 4(1): 66-80.