Becoming Metric-Wise
by
Becoming Metric-Wise: A Bibliometric Guide for Researchers aims to inform researchers about metrics so that they become aware of the evaluative techniques being applied to their scientific output. Understanding these concepts will help them during their funding initiatives, and in hiring and tenure. The book not only describes what indicators do (or are designed to do, which is not always the same thing), but also gives precise mathematical formulae so that indicators can be properly understood and evaluated. Metrics have become a critical issue in science, with widespread international discussion taking place on the subject across scientific journals and organizations.As researchers should know the publication-citation context, the mathematical formulae of indicators being used by evaluating committees and their consequences, and how such indicators might be misused, this book provides an ideal tome on the topic.- Provides researchers with a detailed understanding of bibliometric indicators and their applications- Empowers researchers looking to understand the indicators relevant to their work and careers- Presents an informed and rounded picture of bibliometrics, including the strengths and shortcomings of particular indicators- Supplies the mathematics behind bibliometric indicators so they can be properly understood- Written by authors with longstanding expertise who are considered global leaders in the field of bibliometrics
Bibliometrics and Research Evaluation
by
Why bibliometrics is useful for understanding the global dynamics of science but generate perverse effects when applied inappropriately in research evaluation and university rankings. The research evaluation market is booming. "Ranking," "metrics," "h-index," and "impact factors" are reigning buzzwords. Government and research administrators want to evaluate everything--teachers, professors, training programs, universities--using quantitative indicators. Among the tools used to measure "research excellence," bibliometrics--aggregate data on publications and citations--has become dominant. Bibliometrics is hailed as an "objective" measure of research quality, a quantitative measure more useful than "subjective" and intuitive evaluation methods such as peer review that have been used since scientific papers were first published in the seventeenth century. In this book, Yves Gingras offers a spirited argument against an unquestioning reliance on bibliometrics as an indicator of research quality. Gingras shows that bibliometric rankings have no real scientific validity, rarely measuring what they pretend to. Although the study of publication and citation patterns, at the proper scales, can yield insights on the global dynamics of science over time, ill-defined quantitative indicators often generate perverse and unintended effects on the direction of research. Moreover, abuse of bibliometrics occurs when data is manipulated to boost rankings. Gingras looks at the politics of evaluation and argues that using numbers can be a way to control scientists and diminish their autonomy in the evaluation process. Proposing precise criteria for establishing the validity of indicators at a given scale of analysis, Gingras questions why universities are so eager to let invalid indicators influence their research strategy.
Meaningful Metrics
by
The Tyranny of Metrics
by
How the obsession with quantifying human performance threatens our schools, medical care, businesses, and government Today, organizations of all kinds are ruled by the belief that the path to success is quantifying human performance, publicizing the results, and dividing up the rewards based on the numbers. But in our zeal to instill the evaluation process with scientific rigor, we've gone from measuring performance to fixating on measuring itself. The result is a tyranny of metrics that threatens the quality of our lives and most important institutions. In this timely and powerful book, Jerry Muller uncovers the damage our obsession with metrics is causing--and shows how we can begin to fix the problem. Filled with examples from education, medicine, business and finance, government, the police and military, and philanthropy and foreign aid, this brief and accessible book explains why the seemingly irresistible pressure to quantify performance distorts and distracts, whether by encouraging "gaming the stats" or "teaching to the test." That's because what can and does get measured is not always worth measuring, may not be what we really want to know, and may draw effort away from the things we care about. Along the way, we learn why paying for measured performance doesn't work, why surgical scorecards may increase deaths, and much more. But metrics can be good when used as a complement to--rather than a replacement for--judgment based on personal experience, and Muller also gives examples of when metrics have been beneficial. Complete with a checklist of when and how to use metrics, The Tyranny of Metrics is an essential corrective to a rarely questioned trend that increasingly affects us all.
Journal-level metrics are traditional, citation-based metrics that are calculated based the entire journal and usually include various calculations of the number of articles in a given journal, the subject area, and the number of citations those articles received. Journal metrics are often based on annual calculations, over specific periods of time (e.g. two years, five years).
On this page, you'll find the most commonly used and referenced journal-level metrics. Each of them are calculated slightly differently, based on slightly different data, and may produce different results. Before using any of these metrics, be sure to thoroughly research how they are calculated, what they include, and whether they are transparent about their data sources.
Journal Citation Reports (JCR) is a database that provides quantitative tools for ranking, evaluating, categorizing, and comparing the citation and publication information of journals indexed in the Clarivate Web of Science Core Collection. The primary metric that JCR calculates is the Journal Impact Factor (JIF) which is a metric calculated based on the number of citations a journal receives divided by a count of its published articles, over a two year period.
The JIF is always one calendar year behind, as it only measures citations for the previous two complete calendar years (e.g. the 2024 JIF became available in June 2025). As of 2025, the JIF no longer includes citations to and from retracted content.
You can search for the JIF by Journal Name, Category (subject area), Publisher Name, or Country/Region.
Compare journals by total citations, JIF, their JIF Quartile, the Journal Citation Indicator, and/or their percent Open Access.
Eigenfactor Metrics are journal metrics calculated by the Eigenfactor Project, which is a research project funded by the West Lab and the Bergstrom Lab at the University of Washington as part of their research. Eigenfactor contains two primary metrics - the Eigenfactor Score and the Article Influence Score. These scores are normalized (adjusted) based on citation differences between disciplines, and calculated on a five-year time frame.
You can find Eigenfactor Metrics in Journal Citation Reports, as well as for free from the Eigenfactor Project website (after a six month embargo).
You can search for Eigenfactor Metrics by Journal Name, ISSN, Publisher Name, Year of publication, or ISI Category (subject area).
Note that you can also find journal pricing information for some journals listed in the database, with data going back to 2007.
SCImago Journal & Country Rank (SJR) is free source that includes the journal and country rankings developed from Elsevier's Scopus database. It ranks journals and compares journal citation among countries, based on total citations and published documents over a three year period. The database contains metrics going back to 1999, and also includes some data on open access publications, book series, conference proceedings, and gender.
You can search by specific journal information (such as name, ISSN, or publisher) or select general options to browse available rankings. Filtering by subject categories is available in the Journal Ranks listing.
Note: Additional information is available in limited formats, including journal article processing charge (APC) data.
CiteScore was launched in 2016 by Elsevier as a part of the Scopus suite of metrics, and is the Scopus version of the journal impact factor. This annual metric calculates the number of citations divided by the number of "documents" (articles, reviews, conference papers, books) in a given journal over a four year period.
Scopus requires an ACE account login to access, however, the CiteScore and Sources data is freely available to access.
