Skip to main content
Log in

Comparing two “thermometers”: Impact factors of 20 leading economic journals according to Journal Citation Reports and Scopus

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Impact factors for 20 journals ranked first by Journal Citation Reports (JCR) were compared with the same indicator calculated on the basis of citation data obtained from Scopus database. A significant discrepancy was observed as Scopus, though results differed from title to title, found in general more citations than listed in JCR. This also affected ranking of the journals. More thorough examination of two selected titles proved that the divergence resulted mainly from difference in coverage of two products, although other important factors also play their part.

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

Access this article

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

  • Bakkalbasi, N., Bauer, K., Glover, J., Wang, L. (2006), Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science, Biomedical Digital Libraries, 3. Text available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1742-5581-3-7

  • Bar-Ilan, J., Levene, M., Lin, A. (2007), Some measures for comparing citation databases, Journal of Informetrics, 1(1): 26–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bollen, J., Rodriguez, M. A., Van De Sompel, H. (2006), Journal status, Scientometrics, 69(3): 669–687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Moya-Anegon, F., Chinchilla-Rodriguez, Z., Vargas-Quesada, B., Corera-Alvarez, E., Munoz-Fernandez, F. J., Gonzalez-Molina, A., Herrero-Solana, V. (2007), Coverage analysis of Scopus: A journal metric approach, Scientometrics, 73(1): 53–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Egghe, L., Rousseau, R. (1996), Average and global impact of a set of journals, Scientometrics, 36(1): 97–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Egghe, L., Rousseau, R. (2002), A general framework for relative impact indicators, The Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science, 27: 29–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garfield, E. (1983), Quality control at ISI: A piece of your mind can help us in our quest for error-free bibliographic information, Current Contents, 19: 5–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garfield, E. (1990), Journal editors awaken to the impact of citation errors. How we control them at ISI, Current Contents, 41: 5–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garfield, E., Sher, I. H. (1963), New factors in the evaluation of scientific literature through citation indexing, American Documentation, 14(3): 195–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacso, P. (2004), ISI Web of Science, Scopus, and SPORTDiscus, Online, 28(6): 51–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacso, P. (2005), As we may search - comparison of major features of the Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar citation-based and citation-enhanced databases, Current Science, 89(9): 1537–1547.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laguardia, C. (2005), Scopus vs. web of science, Library Journal, 130(1): 40–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Libmann, F. (2007), Web of Science, Scopus, and Classical Online: Philosophies of searching, Online, 31(3): 36–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meho, L. I., Yang, K. (2007), Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of Science versus Scopus and Google Scholar, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(13): 2105–2125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinsky, G., Narin, F. (1976), Citation influence for journal aggregates of scientific publications: Theory, with application to the literature of physics, Information Processing & Management, 12(5): 297–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pislyakov, V. V. (2007), Methods for assessment of scientific knowledge through citation indicators, Sotsiologicheskii Zhurnal, 1: 128–140 (in Russian).

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, D. L. (2005), The emergence of competitors to the Science Citation Index and the Web of Science, Current Science, 89(9–10): 1531–1536.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, R. (1988), Citation distribution of pure mathematics journals. In: Egghe, L., Rousseau, R., (Eds), Informetrics 87/88, Amsterdam, Elsevier, 249–262.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, R. (2002), Journal evaluation: Technical and practical issues, Library Trends, 50(3): 418–439.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Van Hooydonk, G., Gevaert, R., Milis-Proost, G., Van De Sompel, H., Debackere, K. (1994), A bibliotheconomic analysis of the impact factors of scientific disciplines, Scientometrics, 30(1): 65–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vladimir Pislyakov.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pislyakov, V. Comparing two “thermometers”: Impact factors of 20 leading economic journals according to Journal Citation Reports and Scopus. Scientometrics 79, 541–550 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-2016-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-2016-1

Keywords

Navigation