↓ Skip to main content

PLOS

Rising Publication Delays Inflate Journal Impact Factors

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, December 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

blogs
7 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
315 X users
facebook
7 Facebook pages
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
8 Google+ users
reddit
2 Redditors

Citations

dimensions_citation
82 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
143 Mendeley
citeulike
4 CiteULike
Title
Rising Publication Delays Inflate Journal Impact Factors
Published in
PLOS ONE, December 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0053374
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adriano B. L. Tort, Zé H. Targino, Olavo B. Amaral

Abstract

Journal impact factors have become an important criterion to judge the quality of scientific publications over the years, influencing the evaluation of institutions and individual researchers worldwide. However, they are also subject to a number of criticisms. Here we point out that the calculation of a journal's impact factor is mainly based on the date of publication of its articles in print form, despite the fact that most journals now make their articles available online before that date. We analyze 61 neuroscience journals and show that delays between online and print publication of articles increased steadily over the last decade. Importantly, such a practice varies widely among journals, as some of them have no delays, while for others this period is longer than a year. Using a modified impact factor based on online rather than print publication dates, we demonstrate that online-to-print delays can artificially raise a journal's impact factor, and that this inflation is greater for longer publication lags. We also show that correcting the effect of publication delay on impact factors changes journal rankings based on this metric. We thus suggest that indexing of articles in citation databases and calculation of citation metrics should be based on the date of an article's online appearance, rather than on that of its publication in print.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 315 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 143 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 3%
United Kingdom 3 2%
Spain 3 2%
Netherlands 3 2%
Sweden 2 1%
Portugal 2 1%
Canada 2 1%
India 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Other 2 1%
Unknown 119 83%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 25 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 11%
Student > Master 15 10%
Librarian 13 9%
Professor 12 8%
Other 48 34%
Unknown 14 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 15%
Social Sciences 21 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 12%
Computer Science 11 8%
Psychology 9 6%
Other 39 27%
Unknown 25 17%