A multidimensional analysis of Aslib proceedings – using everything but the impact factor

A multidimensional analysis of Aslib proceedings – using everything but the impact factor Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to show that the journal impact factor (IF) is not able to reflect the full impact of scholarly journals and provides an overview of alternative and complementary methods in journal evaluation. Design/methodology/approach – Aslib Proceedings (AP) is exemplarily analyzed with a set of indicators from five dimensions of journal evaluation, i.e. journal output, content, perception and usage, citations and management to accurately reflect its various strengths and weaknesses beyond the IF. Findings – AP has become more international in terms of authors and more diverse regarding its topics. Citation impact is generally low and, with the exception of a special issue on blogs, remains world average. However, an evaluation of downloads and Mendeley readers reveals that the journal is an important source of information for professionals and students and certain topics are frequently read but not cited. Research limitations/implications – The study is limited to one journal. Practical implications – An overview of various indicators and methods is provided that can be applied in the quantitative evaluation of scholarly journals (and also to articles, authors and institutions). Originality/value – After a publication history of more than 60 years, this analysis takes stock of AP, highlighting strengths and weaknesses and developments over time. The case study provides an example and overview of the possibilities of multidimensional journal evaluation. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Aslib Journal of Information Management Emerald Publishing

A multidimensional analysis of Aslib proceedings – using everything but the impact factor

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/a-multidimensional-analysis-of-aslib-proceedings-using-everything-but-ftb0yid02u
Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
Copyright © 2014 Emerald Group Publishing Limited. All rights reserved.
ISSN
2050-3806
D.O.I.
10.1108/AJIM-11-2013-0127
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to show that the journal impact factor (IF) is not able to reflect the full impact of scholarly journals and provides an overview of alternative and complementary methods in journal evaluation. Design/methodology/approach – Aslib Proceedings (AP) is exemplarily analyzed with a set of indicators from five dimensions of journal evaluation, i.e. journal output, content, perception and usage, citations and management to accurately reflect its various strengths and weaknesses beyond the IF. Findings – AP has become more international in terms of authors and more diverse regarding its topics. Citation impact is generally low and, with the exception of a special issue on blogs, remains world average. However, an evaluation of downloads and Mendeley readers reveals that the journal is an important source of information for professionals and students and certain topics are frequently read but not cited. Research limitations/implications – The study is limited to one journal. Practical implications – An overview of various indicators and methods is provided that can be applied in the quantitative evaluation of scholarly journals (and also to articles, authors and institutions). Originality/value – After a publication history of more than 60 years, this analysis takes stock of AP, highlighting strengths and weaknesses and developments over time. The case study provides an example and overview of the possibilities of multidimensional journal evaluation.

Journal

Aslib Journal of Information ManagementEmerald Publishing

Published: Jan 1, 2014

Keywords: Citation analysis; Scholarly communication; Usage statistics; Impact factor; Journal evaluation; Mendeley

References

  • Assessing the value of a journal beyond the impact factor
    Coleman, A.
  • Dr Jekyll and Dr Hyde: author‐reader asymmetries in scholarly publishing
    Mabe, M.A.; Amin, M.
  • Citation Analysis in Research Evaluation
    Moed, H.F.
  • A new classification system to describe the ageing of scientific journals and their impact factors
    Moed, H.F.; van Leeuwen, T.N.; Reedijk, J.
  • The missing link: journal usage metrics
    Rowlands, I.; Nicholas, D.
  • How to normalize cooccurrence data? An analysis of some well‐known similarity measures
    van Eck, N.J.; Waltman, L.
  • The relation between eigenfactor, audience factor, and influence weight
    Waltman, L.; van Eck, N.J.

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off