Journal ranking

What Is Journal Ranking?

Journal ranking refers to the systematic evaluation and categorization of academic journals based on predefined criteria, aiming to assess their relative quality, influence, and prestige within their respective fields. This process is a key component of Research Quality Assessment in academia and plays a role in how information and scholarly output are perceived. Journal ranking serves as a guide for researchers, institutions, and funding bodies in making informed decisions about where to publish, which sources to consult for reliable information, and how to allocate resources. The criteria for journal ranking often include factors such as citation impact, the rigor of the peer review process, publication frequency, and international reach.

History and Origin

The concept of evaluating the importance of scientific literature dates back centuries, but modern journal ranking, particularly through quantitative metrics, largely began in the mid-22nd century with the advent of the Journal Impact Factor (JIF). Eugene Garfield, a bibliographer, first proposed the idea of an impact factor in a 1955 Science article, later leading to the creation of the Science Citation Index (SCI) in 1961.²² By the early 1960s, Garfield and Irving H. Sher developed the JIF to help select journals for the new SCI, seeking a method to compare journals regardless of their size or total citation frequency.²¹ The first journal impact factors were released by Garfield's Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) in 1972, initially intended to help librarians make decisions about journal subscriptions and to identify highly cited journals.²⁰ Over time, this metric became a dominant tool in the broader practice of journal ranking.

Key Takeaways

• Journal ranking systematically evaluates academic journals based on influence and quality.
• The Journal Impact Factor (JIF) is a prominent quantitative metrics used in journal ranking, developed by Eugene Garfield.
• Rankings influence researchers' decisions on where to publish, potentially impacting academic career progression and research funding.
• Despite their utility, journal rankings face significant criticism regarding their accuracy, potential for manipulation, and overemphasis in evaluating individual research and researchers.
• Initiatives like the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) advocate for more holistic evaluation of research impact beyond journal-based metrics.

Formula and Calculation

The most widely recognized metric in journal ranking, the Journal Impact Factor (JIF), is calculated annually. It measures the average number of citations received in a particular year by articles published in that journal during the two preceding years.

The formula for the 2-year Journal Impact Factor (JIF) is:

For example, to calculate the 2024 Impact Factor for an academic journal:

• Numerator (A): The number of times articles published in 2022 and 2023 were cited by other journals indexed in Clarivate's Web of Science during 2024.
• Denominator (B): The total number of "citable items" (typically original research articles and review articles) published by that journal in 2022 and 2023.

The JIF is then calculated as A divided by B.¹⁹ Other bibliometrics used in journal ranking may have different formulas, considering factors like the prestige of citing journals (e.g., SCImago Journal Rank) or a longer citation window (e.g., CiteScore).

Interpreting the Journal Ranking

Interpreting journal ranking involves understanding that while a higher rank generally suggests greater influence and visibility, it does not necessarily equate to the intrinsic quality of every single article published within that journal.¹⁸ A high-ranking journal, particularly one with a high Journal Impact Factor, indicates that its published content is frequently cited by other researchers, suggesting its prominence in scholarly communication.

However, it is crucial to consider the disciplinary context. Citation practices vary widely across fields; a top-ranked journal in one discipline might have a significantly lower JIF than a top-ranked journal in another, due to differing publication volumes, citation behaviors, and the speed at which research builds upon previous work. For effective data analysis of journal rankings, it's recommended to compare journals only within the same subject categories.

Hypothetical Example

Imagine Dr. Anya Sharma, a financial economist, is deciding where to publish her research on the impact of quantitative easing on emerging markets. She has identified three potential academic journals: The Journal of Economic Policy, Global Finance Review, and Emerging Market Quarterly.

1. Researching Rankings: Dr. Sharma consults a reputable journal ranking database. She finds that for her specific sub-field of financial economics:

   • The Journal of Economic Policy is ranked in the first quartile (Q1), with a high Journal Impact Factor, indicating frequent citation and strong influence.
   • Global Finance Review is in the second quartile (Q2).
   • Emerging Market Quarterly is in the third quartile (Q3).

2. Strategic Decision: Based on this journal ranking, Dr. Sharma initially considers The Journal of Economic Policy for its high visibility and perceived prestige. However, she also considers the audience and scope. Her paper is highly specific to emerging markets. While The Journal of Economic Policy has a broader appeal, Emerging Market Quarterly directly targets her niche audience.

3. Outcome: Dr. Sharma decides to submit to The Journal of Economic Policy first, aiming for the highest possible research impact and visibility within the broader economic community. If rejected, she will then consider Emerging Market Quarterly for its specialized readership. This decision-making process illustrates how journal ranking, alongside other factors, guides publication strategies for academics.

Practical Applications

Journal ranking has several practical applications across academia, research, and indirectly, in the broader landscape of information quality that can influence investment research:

• Publication Strategy for Researchers: Academics often use journal ranking to identify the most prestigious and impactful outlets for their work, aiming to maximize the visibility and influence of their research. Publishing in higher-ranked journals is frequently seen as beneficial for academic career progression, including tenure, promotion, and grant applications.¹⁷,¹⁶
• Library and Institutional Resource Allocation: University libraries and research institutions may consult journal rankings when making decisions about subscriptions and acquisitions, ensuring access to key publications within various disciplines.
• Research Assessment and Funding Decisions: Funding bodies and academic departments sometimes use journal ranking as a proxy for the quality of an individual's publication record when evaluating grant proposals or hiring new faculty. However, this practice is highly contentious and criticized.,¹⁵ The San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA), signed by thousands of organizations and individuals globally, explicitly recommends against using journal-based metrics like the Journal Impact Factor as a surrogate measure of the quality of individual research articles or in hiring, promotion, or funding decisions.,¹⁴,¹³ This initiative advocates for evaluating research based on its own merits, rather than the journal in which it is published.
• Information Filtering and Credibility: In a broader sense, understanding journal ranking can assist anyone consuming academic information, including those conducting investment research, to gauge the potential credibility and influence of a source. While not a definitive measure, a higher-ranked journal often implies a more rigorous peer review process and potentially a higher standard of scientific integrity.

Limitations and Criticisms

Despite their widespread use, journal rankings, particularly those heavily reliant on single metrics like the Journal Impact Factor, face significant limitations and criticisms.

• Lack of Individual Article Quality: A high journal ranking does not guarantee the quality or impact of every article published within that journal. The ranking is an average, and some highly cited papers (e.g., review articles) can disproportionately inflate a journal's score, meaning many individual articles might receive few or no citations.¹²,¹¹
• Disciplinary Bias: Citation patterns and publication frequencies vary significantly across different academic disciplines. Applying a single metric universally across fields can be misleading, as a "good" impact factor in one area might be considered low in another.¹⁰ This can lead to publication bias where researchers might favor journals in fields with inherently higher citation rates.
• Manipulation and Gaming: Journals may employ tactics to artificially inflate their rankings, such as encouraging self-citations, publishing more review articles, or manipulating what counts as a "citable item."⁹,⁸
• Focus on Quantity over Quality/Relevance: An overreliance on journal ranking can incentivize researchers to publish in high-impact journals rather than focusing on novel, rigorous, or socially impactful research that might be better suited for more specialized, lower-ranked outlets.⁷ This can hinder the embrace of new scholarly communication models like open access.
• Negative Impact on Research Practices: Critics argue that the institutionalization of journal rank as an assessment tool can lead to questionable research practices, and some studies suggest a correlation between higher journal rank and increased retraction rates, possibly due to pressure to publish "impactful" findings.⁶,⁵

The San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) emerged from these concerns, advocating for a shift towards evaluating research on its intrinsic merit rather than the journal it appears in.⁴ Many institutions and research funding bodies have signed DORA, committing to broader, more qualitative approaches to research evaluation.³,²

Journal Ranking vs. Journal Impact Factor

While often used interchangeably, journal ranking and Journal Impact Factor (JIF) represent distinct but related concepts in research quality assessment.

• Journal Ranking is a broad process of evaluating and ordering academic journals, often within specific subject categories. It can involve various criteria, including quantitative metrics (like JIF, CiteScore, SNIP, SCImago Journal Rank, Eigenfactor), qualitative assessment (e.g., expert opinion, editorial quality, peer review rigor), and even surveys of academics. Journal ranking aims to position a journal within its field, reflecting its perceived prestige and difficulty of publication.
• The Journal Impact Factor is a specific, widely-used quantitative metric that contributes to journal ranking. It is calculated by Clarivate (formerly ISI) and measures the average number of times articles published in a journal in the previous two years were cited in the current year. While the JIF is a very prominent component, it is just one of many potential metrics that can inform a broader journal ranking system. The JIF is a numerical score, whereas a journal ranking is typically a categorized position (e.g., Q1, top 10%) often derived from such scores.¹

Confusion often arises because the JIF is so dominant that it's frequently used as a shorthand for a journal's overall standing or "rank." However, a comprehensive journal ranking considers a more holistic view of a journal's influence and quality.

FAQs

What is the primary purpose of journal ranking?

The primary purpose of journal ranking is to assess the relative influence, quality, and prestige of academic journals within specific disciplines. It helps researchers decide where to publish, guides libraries in subscription choices, and assists institutions in evaluating research output.

Are all journal rankings based on the Journal Impact Factor?

No, not all journal rankings are based solely on the Journal Impact Factor. While the JIF is a very influential and widely recognized metric, other bibliometrics such as CiteScore, SCImago Journal Rank (SJR), and Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) are also used. Some ranking systems may also incorporate qualitative assessment elements, like expert surveys or editorial board composition.

Why is there controversy surrounding journal ranking?

Controversy arises because journal ranking, especially when heavily reliant on single quantitative metrics, can be misused. Critics argue that these rankings may not accurately reflect the quality of individual articles, can lead to perverse incentives for researchers and journals, and vary significantly across disciplines. Initiatives like the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) advocate for broader, more responsible evaluation practices.

How does journal ranking affect a researcher's career?

Journal ranking can significantly affect a researcher's academic career because publishing in higher-ranked journals is often a factor in decisions regarding tenure, promotion, and research funding. However, there is a growing movement to assess research output based on its intrinsic merit and diverse impact rather than solely on the prestige of the publication venue.