The Consequences of Predicting Scientific Impact in Psychology Using Journal Impact Factors
- 5 January 2012
- journal article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Perspectives on Psychological Science
- Vol. 7 (1), 72-78
- https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691611429356
Abstract
An academic journal’s impact factor (hereafter JIF) is an average measure of the citation count of individual articles published in that journal. JIF is used to assess merit, predict impact, and allocate resources, but the actual number of citations to individual articles is only modestly correlated with the JIFs of the journals in which they are published. We counted PsycInfo citations to 1,133 articles published in nine leading psychology journals (1996–2005). Both article length ( r =.31) and reference list length ( r = .41) predicted log-transformed citation counts better than JIF ( r = .27). Articles with fewer graphs and more structural equation models were more frequently cited. Citation count was better predicted by a model based on article length and citation count rather than JIF. When JIF was used to predict citation count, the impact of women authors and social science research was underestimated. These findings distinguish impact in science, as measured by JIF, from actual impact in psychology, and they show the unintended consequences of using a measure of the former to predict the latter.This publication has 34 references indexed in Scilit:
- Citation StatisticsStatistical Science, 2009
- What makes an article influential? Predicting impact in social and personality psychologyScientometrics, 2008
- What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behaviorJournal of Documentation, 2008
- The History and Meaning of the Journal Impact FactorJAMA, 2006
- The explosion of knowledge, references, and citations: Psychology's unique response to a crisis.American Psychologist, 2003
- Stereotypes as Dynamic Constructs: Women and Men of the Past, Present, and FuturePersonality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2000
- Normative versus Social Constructivist Processes in the Allocation of Citations: A Network-Analytic ModelAmerican Sociological Review, 1998
- Sex bias in psychological research: Progress or complacency?American Psychologist, 1992
- CITATIONS, OBSOLESCENCE, ENDURING ARTICLES, AND MULTIPLE AUTHORSHIPSJournal of Documentation, 1976
- Citation Analysis as a Tool in Journal EvaluationScience, 1972