Title |
Effectiveness of Journal Ranking Schemes as a Tool for Locating Information
|
---|---|
Published in |
PLOS ONE, February 2008
|
DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0001683 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Michael J. Stringer, Marta Sales-Pardo, Luís A. Nunes Amaral |
Abstract |
The rise of electronic publishing, preprint archives, blogs, and wikis is raising concerns among publishers, editors, and scientists about the present day relevance of academic journals and traditional peer review. These concerns are especially fuelled by the ability of search engines to automatically identify and sort information. It appears that academic journals can only remain relevant if acceptance of research for publication within a journal allows readers to infer immediate, reliable information on the value of that research. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 4 | 57% |
Spain | 1 | 14% |
Unknown | 2 | 29% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Scientists | 4 | 57% |
Members of the public | 2 | 29% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 147 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 15 | 10% |
Germany | 3 | 2% |
United Kingdom | 3 | 2% |
Spain | 2 | 1% |
Australia | 2 | 1% |
Malaysia | 1 | <1% |
Kenya | 1 | <1% |
Brazil | 1 | <1% |
Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
Other | 4 | 3% |
Unknown | 114 | 78% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Researcher | 34 | 23% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 27 | 18% |
Librarian | 12 | 8% |
Other | 12 | 8% |
Professor > Associate Professor | 9 | 6% |
Other | 36 | 24% |
Unknown | 17 | 12% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 21 | 14% |
Computer Science | 19 | 13% |
Social Sciences | 19 | 13% |
Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 8% |
Physics and Astronomy | 11 | 7% |
Other | 44 | 30% |
Unknown | 21 | 14% |