Quality weighted citations versus total citations in the sciences and social sciences, with an application to finance and accounting. Issue 4 (11th April 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Chang, Chia-Lin; McAleer, Michael
• Editors: C. Chan, Kam
• Is Part Of: Managerial finance. Volume 42:Issue 4(2016)
• Page Start: 324
• Page End: 337
• Publication Date: 2016-04-11
• Subjects: Impact factors -- Article Influence -- Coercive citations -- Eigenfactor -- Index of citations quality -- Research assessment measures; Corporations -- Finance -- Periodicals; Business enterprises -- Finance -- Periodicals; 658.1505
• DOI: 10.1108/MF-12-2014-0315
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0307-4358

Abstract

Abstract : Purpose: – Both journal self-citations and exchanged citations have the effect of increasing a journal's impact factor, which may be deceptive. The purpose of this paper is to analyse academic journal quality and research impact using quality-weighted citations vs total citations, based on the widely used Thomson Reuters ISI Web of Science citations database (ISI). A new Index of Citations Quality (ICQ) is presented, based on quality-weighted citations. Design/methodology/approach: – The new index is used to analyse the leading 500 journals in both the sciences and social sciences, as well as finance and accounting, using quantifiable Research Assessment Measures (RAMs) that are based on alternative transformations of citations. Findings: – It is shown that ICQ is a useful additional measure to 2-year impact factor (2YIF) and other well-known RAMs for the purpose of evaluating the impact and quality, as well as ranking, of journals as it contains information that has very low correlations with the information contained in the well-known RAMs for both the sciences and social sciences, and finance and accounting. Practical implications: – Journals can, and do, inflate the number of citations through self-citation practices, which may be coercive. Another method for distorting journal impact is through a set of journals agreeing to cite each other, that is, by exchanging citations. This may be less coercive than self-citations, but is nonetheless unprofessional and distortionary. Social implications: – The premise underlying the use of citations data is that higher quality journals generally have a higher number of citations. The impact of citations can be distorted in a number of ways, both consciously and unconsciously. Originality/value: – Regardless of whether self-citations arise through collusive practices, the increase in citations will affect both 2YIF and 5-year impact factor (5YIF), though not Eigenfactor and Article Influence. This leads to an ICQ, where a higher ICQ would generally be preferred to lower. Unlike 5YIF, which is increased by journal self-citations and exchanged citations, and Eigenfactor and Article Influence, both of which are affected by quality-weighted exchanged citations, ICQ will be less affected by exchanged citations. In the absence of any empirical evidence to the contrary, 5YIF and AI are assumed to be affected similarly by exchanged citations.