In general, journals that charge to access articles TEND to have lower impact factors than those that are open access when comparing apples to apples. Since many journals that are not open access do not charge for publication, there could be some kind of correlation here. But it is probably spurious.
However, this relationship is certainly confounded by corporate journal behaviors. If you have Corporation A and they have three journals Env 1, env2, and env3. They can quickly increase the impact factor simply by recommending citation in ENV1 of papers from ENV2 and ENV3. Then, do the same from the other two. This is done in several ways, some that are more honest than others. However, there is no doubt that this is done. it is sa phenomenon related to discipline size. Large disciplines will always have higher citation ratings than small disciplines. Ornithology has more researchers and journals than herpetology, so the #1 Ornithology journal should always have a higher impact rating than the #1 herpetology journal. Similarly, the #1 immunology journal is higher ranked than the #1 anatomy journal. Now, if you expand this to the h-index it becomes even more complex. h-index scores NORMALLY grow with a journal's or investigator's age, regardless of quality or productivity. The Journal impact factor and the h-index both suffer in that they are parametric statistics being used to examine non-parametrically distributed data. Journal citation rating, regardless of how you rate it, is more accurately described as a power curve than it is a bell curve!!! Ideally, raw h-index scores should not be used except to compare journals or people of similar ages and from very similar disciplines. If you are comparing journals or people who have different lengths of research careers, then you should use the m-quotient, which is simply the h-index score divided by the time since their first publication. There really isn't a good way to compare between disciplines, especially in a world where multidisciplinary and fuzzy margins of fields make things difficult to evaluate. ONe could divide the h-index by the number of journals or the number of investigators in that field and get a more accurate assessment, but that is really suspect. The same can be said for papers. Old papers will almost always have more citations than new papers of equal interest. Simply looking at these ratings is not sufficient to evaluate them. IN fact, the citation industry specifically states that citation analysis should involve multiple citation indices in consort. So, if one was evaluating investigators or journals, you might compare their publication count, h-index (or m-quotient), g-index, and a few others, even including some social media indices. Each tells you something different about that individual's portfolio. IS it getting cited? Is it being read? How frequently? was it cited/read early on and then ignored or visa versa, or has it sustained its interest over the years. A really good resource on this kind o finformation is harzing's website for publish or perish. THere is a very good book in there that might be useful to clear up some of the haze! On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Jorge A. Santiago-Blay < [email protected]> wrote: > Are page charges related to Impact Factor? > > Dear Colleagues: > > I just finished listening to a great talk of recent scholarly publication > trends and, as I reflect on the talk, I wonder if any of you know whether > there is a relationship between the Thomson Reuters IF and page charges for > scholarly journals. > > If any of you know, please send me an email to [email protected] > > Apologies for potentially duplicate emails. > > Gratefully, > > Jorge > > Jorge A. Santiago-Blay, PhD > blaypublishers.com > > 1. Positive experiences for authors of papers published in *LEB* > http://blaypublishers.com/testimonials/ > > 2. Free examples of papers published in *LEB*: http://blaypublishers. > com/category/previous-issues/. > > 3. *Guidelines for Authors* and page charges of *LEB*: > http://blaypublishers.com/archives/ *.* > > 4. Want to subscribe to *LEB*? http://blaypublishers.com/subscriptions/ > > > http://blayjorge.wordpress.com/ > http://paleobiology.si.edu/staff/individuals/santiagoblay.cfm > -- Malcolm L. McCallum Aquaculture and Water Quality Research Scientist School of Agriculture and Applied Sciences Langston University Langston, Oklahoma Link to online CV and portfolio : https://www.visualcv.com/malcolm-mc-callum?access=18A9RYkDGxO Google Scholar citation page: https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=lOHMjvYAAAAJ&hl=en Academia.edu: https://ui-springfield.academia.edu/MalcolmMcCallum/Analytics#/activity/overview?_k=wknchj Researchgate: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Malcolm_Mccallum/reputation?ev=prf_rep_tab <https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Malcolm_Mccallum/reputation?ev=prf_rep_tab> Ratemyprofessor: http://www.ratemyprofessors.com/ShowRatings.jsp?tid=706874 *Confidentiality Notice:* This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. “*Nothing is more priceless and worthy of preservation than the rich array of animal life with which our country has been blessed. It is a many-faceted treasure, of value to scholars, scientists, and nature lovers alike, and it forms a vital part of the heritage we all share as Americans.* ” *-President Richard Nixon upon signing the Endangered Species Act of 1973 into law.* "*Peer pressure is designed to contain anyone with a sense of drive*" -* Allan Nation* *1880's: *"*There's lots of good fish in the sea*" W.S. Gilbert *1990's:* Many fish stocks depleted due to overfishing, habitat loss,and pollution. 2000: Marine reserves, ecosystem restoration, and pollution reduction *MAY* help restore populations. 2022: "Soylent Green is People!" Charleton Heston as Detective Thorn 2022: "People were always awful, but their was a world once, and it was beautiful.' Edward G. Robinson as Sol Roth. The Seven Blunders of the World (Mohandas Gandhi) Wealth w/o work Pleasure w/o conscience Knowledge w/o character Commerce w/o morality Science w/o humanity Worship w/o sacrifice Politics w/o principle
