Skip to Main Content

Research Impact Metrics

Provides an overview of Research Impact Metrics

Journal metrics

Journal metrics measure, compare, and rank research and scholarly publications. They can also be referred to as journal rankings, journal importance, or a journal's impact. Journal metrics allow scholars and researchers to compare scholarly periodicals. 

Each journal ranking metric uses its own formula to determine a journal's importance to the research community. Many include counting the number of times the journal has been cited in other works. The differing formulas and methodology mean the results will differ from metric to metric. 

Comparing results from more than one metric will provide a better picture of the real impact of a journal. Commonly used journal metrics include:

  • Journal Impact Factor (JIF): Measures the average number of citations received by articles published in a journal during the previous two years.
  • CiteScore: Similar to JIF, but it considers citations over a four-year period.
  • SCImago Journal Rank (SJR): Accounts for both the number of citations received by a journal and the prestige of the journals where such citations come from.
  • Source-Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP): Measures contextual citation impact by weighting citations based on the total number of citations in a subject field.
  • Journal Quartiles: Journal quartiles rank academic journals into four categories based on their impact and quality: Q1 (top 25%), Q2 (25-50%), Q3 (50-75%), and Q4 (bottom 25%). Q1 journals are the most prestigious with the highest impact factors, while Q4 journals have the lowest. These quartiles help researchers identify influential journals in their field and decide where to submit their work. 

Journal Impact Factor (JIF) is a metric developed by Web of Science, and CiteScore, SJR and SNIP are metrics used by Scopus.

Journal information databases

Ulrichsweb global serials directory is a comprehensive global serials directory that provides detailed information about journals, magazines, and other serials. It includes information on serials from scholarly, consumer, trade, and niche publishers across all subjects, regions, and languages, the label "Referred" indicates if a journal is peer-reviewed.

DOAJ (Directory of Open Access Journals) is an online directory that indexes and provides access to high-quality, peer-reviewed open access journals. DOAJ applies strict criteria to ensure that only reputable and high-quality journals are included.

Predatory Journals  

"Predatory journals and publishers are entities that prioritize self-interest at the expense of scholarship and are characterized by false or misleading information, deviation from best editorial and publication practices, a lack of transparency, and/or the use of aggressive and indiscriminate solicitation practices".

Think. Check. Submit helps researchers identify trusted journals for their research. The University has developed a guide and checklist to assist with making decisions around publishing your work strategically.  You may also consider publishing as Open Access to increase the reach of your research.

List of predatory journals and publishers:

Journal metrics reflect the average citation rate for the journal as a whole, not for individual articles. This means that high-impact articles in lower-ranked journals can be overlooked. Journal metrics can be manipulated through practices like excessive self-citation or preferentially publishing review articles, which tend to be cited more frequently.

Some funding agencies like NHMRC do not accept using journal metrics to evaluate individual researcher's impact; a list of these organisations have joined San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA), which was developed in 2012 by a group of editors and publishers in the Annual Meeting of The American Society for Cell Biology. This organisation criticizes the use of Journal Impact Factor (JIF) as a primary measure of research quality due to its limitations and potential for manipulation. The declaration encourages a shift towards more meaningful and transparent research assessment practices:

  • General: Avoid using journal-based metrics like JIF for assessing individual research articles or scientists.
  • For Funding Agencies: Focus on the scientific content of papers rather than publication metrics.
  • For Institutions: Use clear criteria for hiring and promotion, emphasizing the quality of research over journal metrics.
  • For Researchers: Assess research based on content and use a variety of metrics to demonstrate impact.