Informatics Publishing Limited

Subbiah Gunasekaran ¹, Subbiah Arunachalam ²

Affiliations
1 Knowledge Resource Centre, CSIRCentral Electrochemical Research Institute, Karaikudi 623 302, IN
2 Centre for Internet and Society, 194, 2nd C Cross, Domlur 2nd Stage, Bangalore 560 071, IN

Abstract

We have compared the 2-year and 5-year impact factors (IFs), normalized impact factors (NIFs) and rank normalized impact factors (RNIFs) of open access (OA) and subscription journals across the 22 major fields delineated in Essential Science Indicators. Journal Citation Reports (JCR) 2012 has assigned 2-year IF to 1,073 OA and 7,290 subscription journals and 5-year IF to 811 OA and 6,705 subscription journals. Overall 12.8% of journals listed in JCR are OA, but a higher percentage of journals are OA in 9 fields, including multidisciplinary (31%), agriculture (19.1%) and microbiology (19.1). Overall 2-year IF is higher than 5-year IF in about 31.5% journals in both OA and subscription journals. But among physics journals, two-thirds of OA journals and 58% of subscription journals have a higher 2-year IF. For multidisciplinary journals the mean RNIF is higher for OA journals than subscription journals. Higher proportion of subscription journals had mean RNIF above 0.5: 361 of 1,073 OA journals (33.6%) and 3,857 of 7,280 subscription journals (52.9%) had a 2-year mean RNIF above 0.5 and 277 of 811 OA journals (34.2%) and 3,453 of 6705 (51.5%) subscription journals had a 5-year mean RINF above 0.5. Moving to OA has proven to be advantageous to developing country journals; it has helped a large number of Latin American and many Indian journals improve their IF.

Keywords

Impact Factor, Normalized Impact Factor, Open Access Journals, Rank Normalized Impact Factor, Subscription Journals.

Full Text

   

Muthu Madhan ¹, Siva Shankar Kimidi ², Subbiah Gunasekaran ³, Subbiah Arunachalam ¹

Affiliations
1 DST Centre for Policy Research, Archives and Publication Cell, Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru 560 012, IN
2 Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad, Kandi, Sangareddy 502 285, IN
3 Knowledge Resources Centre, Central Elecrochemical Research Institute, Karaikudi 630 003, IN

Abstract

Paying to publish is an ethical issue. During 2010-14 Indian researchers have used 488 open access (OA) journals levying article processing charge (APC), ranging from US$ 7.5 to 5,000, to publish about 15,400 papers. Use of OA journals levying APC has increased from 242 journals and 2,557 papers in 2010 to 328 journals and 3,634 papers in 2014. We estimate that India is potentially spending about US$ 2.4 million annually on APCs paid to OA journals and the amount would be much more if we add APCs paid to make papers published in hybrid journals open access. It would be prudent for Indian authors to make their work freely available through interoperable repositories, a trend that is growing in Latin America and China, especially when funding is scarce. Scientists are ready to pay APC as long as institutions pay for it and funding agencies are not ready to insist that grants provided for research should not be used for paying APC.

Full Text

   

Muthu Madhan , Siva Shankar Kimidi , Subbiah Gunasekaran , Subbiah Arunachalam

Abstract

We inadvertently missed to present the total number of papers written by Indian researchers in the first sentence under the Discussion section (page 707). Please read the sentence as 'Over 14.4% (or 37,122) of the 256,822 papers from India as seen from SCIE have been published in OA journals'.

Full Text

   

Subbiah Arunachalam ¹

Affiliations
1 DST Centre for Policy Research, Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru 560 012, IN

Abstract

Eugene Garfield, the celebrated information scientist and inventor of the Science Citation Index, died on 26 February. He was 91 and lived in Brynmawr, a suburb of Philadelphia.

Full Text

   

Subbiah Arunachalam ¹, Muthu Madhan ¹, Subbiah Gunasekaran ²

Affiliations
1 DST Centre for Policy Research, Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru 560 012, IN
2 Knowledge Resources Centre, Central Electrochemical Research Institute, Karaikudi 630 003, IN

Abstract

Against the backdrop of comments on chemistry research in India made in three recent reports prepared by Nature Index, Elsevier and Thomson Reuters, we have made a scientometric analysis of contributions from India in leading multidisciplinary chemistry journals over the 25-year period 1991-2015. We have compared India's performance with that of China as a benchmark. Overall, the number of chemistry papers from India increased steadily between 2007 and 2014. The threeyear moving average of number of papers during the period grew at a compound annual growth rate of 8.9%, and the overall increase in papers was accompanied by a more than proportionate increase in the leading journals. Also, the average number of cites received by papers with at least one author from India in Angewandte Chemie International Edition (Angew. Chem. Int. Ed.) and Accounts of Chemical Research was higher than the world average. Despite its huge share of the world's population (~17%), India continues to be poorly represented in the top journals: the country's share of papers in the Journal of the American Chemical Society is 0.7% compared to 58.4% for USA, 7.6% for Germany and 5.1% for China, and its share in Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. is 1.2% compared to 28% for Germany, 25.3% for USA and 9.9% for China. This could be due to the fact that till recently Indian universities did not encourage mobility across disciplines. That only a small number of Indian researchers and institutions publish in leading journals is also a matter for concern. India accounts for only a small number of papers in the top one percentile of the most highly cited chemistry papers, whereas China leads the world. Only 2.3% of the 2234 papers published in 2014 that are in the top one percentile is from India compared to 38% from China.

Keywords

Chemistry Research, International Collaboration, Multidisciplinary Journals, Scientometric Analysis.

Full Text

   

Subbiah Arunachalam ¹

Affiliations
1 DST Centre for Policy Research, Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru 560 012, IN

Abstract

Right from the time of the Industrial Revolution it became clear that technology was not all good and that it had another side. No doubt thanks to the early technologies – textiles, iron and steel, transportation (steam engine, steam ships, railways, etc.) – productivity increased, drudgery reduced, income levels improved and rural communities were transformed into urban neighbourhoods. But, as social historians would tell us, it was only the rich and the middle class who started enjoying a better quality of life; for the working class life became more difficult. Technology also led to exploitation of labour (long working hours in poor and unsafe conditions, for example) and industrial disputes as was illustrated by the Homestead strike at the Carnegie Steel Company in Pennsylvania in 1892. The social dimensions of today’s technologies, e.g. information technology and biotechnology, are far more serious than those of the earlier technologies. In this book, the author aims to show how science and medicine have altered our lives.

Full Text

   

Subbiah Arunachalam ¹

Affiliations
1 DST Centre for Policy Research, Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru 560 012, IN

Abstract

This book is a comprehensive introduction to the multi-dimensional field of evaluation of research performance, written by an expert with 30 years of experience in teaching, research and organizing conferences in the field. This field has grown considerably since Francis Narin wrote his pioneering report ‘Evaluative bibliometrics: the use of publication and citation analysis in the evaluation of scientific activity’ in 1976 when the company he founded, Computer Horizons Inc., was engaged in gathering and analysing publication and citation data from the Science Citation Index (SCI) for inclusion in the US National Science Foundation’s biennial publication Science Indicators. This book is a continuation of Narin’s report and the author’s own earlier book Citation Analysis in Research Evaluation(2005). It deals with the application of informetrics in research assessment with special attention to its evaluative dimension. The book is intended for a broad audience – all those subjected to research assessment, Master’s and doctoral students, research managers, science policy makers and funders, and practitioners and students of informetrics.

Full Text