Ranking Leading Econometrics Journals Using Citations Data from ISI and RePEc

The paper focuses on the robustness of rankings of academic journal quality and research impact of 10 leading econometrics journals taken from the Thomson Reuters ISI Web of Science (ISI) Category of Economics, using citations data from ISI and the highly accessible Research Papers in Economics (ReP...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Chia-Lin Chang, Michael McAleer
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2013-11-01
Series:Econometrics
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.mdpi.com/2225-1146/1/3/217
id doaj-ea587275a1b34cd4923e4adf5120f8f3
record_format Article
spelling doaj-ea587275a1b34cd4923e4adf5120f8f32020-11-24T22:32:12ZengMDPI AGEconometrics2225-11462013-11-011321723510.3390/econometrics1030217econometrics1030217Ranking Leading Econometrics Journals Using Citations Data from ISI and RePEcChia-Lin Chang0Michael McAleer1Department of Applied Economics, and Department of Finance, National Chung Hsing University, Taichung 402, TaiwanDepartment of Quantitative Finance, National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu 300, TaiwanThe paper focuses on the robustness of rankings of academic journal quality and research impact of 10 leading econometrics journals taken from the Thomson Reuters ISI Web of Science (ISI) Category of Economics, using citations data from ISI and the highly accessible Research Papers in Economics (RePEc) database that is widely used in economics, finance and related disciplines. The journals are ranked using quantifiable static and dynamic Research Assessment Measures (RAMs), with 15 RAMs from ISI and five RAMs from RePEc. The similarities and differences in various RAMs, which are based on alternative weighted and unweighted transformations of citations, are highlighted to show which RAMs are able to provide informational value relative to others. The RAMs include the impact factor, mean citations and non-citations, journal policy, number of high quality papers, and journal influence and article influence. The paper highlights robust rankings based on the harmonic mean of the ranks of 20 RAMs, which in some cases are closely related. It is shown that emphasizing the most widely-used RAM, the two-year impact factor of a journal, can lead to a distorted evaluation of journal quality, impact and influence relative to the harmonic mean of the ranks. Some suggestions regarding the use of the most informative RAMs are also given.http://www.mdpi.com/2225-1146/1/3/217research assessment measurescitationsimpactinfluenceharmonic meanrobust journal rankingseconometrics
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Chia-Lin Chang
Michael McAleer
spellingShingle Chia-Lin Chang
Michael McAleer
Ranking Leading Econometrics Journals Using Citations Data from ISI and RePEc
Econometrics
research assessment measures
citations
impact
influence
harmonic mean
robust journal rankings
econometrics
author_facet Chia-Lin Chang
Michael McAleer
author_sort Chia-Lin Chang
title Ranking Leading Econometrics Journals Using Citations Data from ISI and RePEc
title_short Ranking Leading Econometrics Journals Using Citations Data from ISI and RePEc
title_full Ranking Leading Econometrics Journals Using Citations Data from ISI and RePEc
title_fullStr Ranking Leading Econometrics Journals Using Citations Data from ISI and RePEc
title_full_unstemmed Ranking Leading Econometrics Journals Using Citations Data from ISI and RePEc
title_sort ranking leading econometrics journals using citations data from isi and repec
publisher MDPI AG
series Econometrics
issn 2225-1146
publishDate 2013-11-01
description The paper focuses on the robustness of rankings of academic journal quality and research impact of 10 leading econometrics journals taken from the Thomson Reuters ISI Web of Science (ISI) Category of Economics, using citations data from ISI and the highly accessible Research Papers in Economics (RePEc) database that is widely used in economics, finance and related disciplines. The journals are ranked using quantifiable static and dynamic Research Assessment Measures (RAMs), with 15 RAMs from ISI and five RAMs from RePEc. The similarities and differences in various RAMs, which are based on alternative weighted and unweighted transformations of citations, are highlighted to show which RAMs are able to provide informational value relative to others. The RAMs include the impact factor, mean citations and non-citations, journal policy, number of high quality papers, and journal influence and article influence. The paper highlights robust rankings based on the harmonic mean of the ranks of 20 RAMs, which in some cases are closely related. It is shown that emphasizing the most widely-used RAM, the two-year impact factor of a journal, can lead to a distorted evaluation of journal quality, impact and influence relative to the harmonic mean of the ranks. Some suggestions regarding the use of the most informative RAMs are also given.
topic research assessment measures
citations
impact
influence
harmonic mean
robust journal rankings
econometrics
url http://www.mdpi.com/2225-1146/1/3/217
work_keys_str_mv AT chialinchang rankingleadingeconometricsjournalsusingcitationsdatafromisiandrepec
AT michaelmcaleer rankingleadingeconometricsjournalsusingcitationsdatafromisiandrepec
_version_ 1725734721785167872