Complutense University Library

Great Expectatrics: Great Papers, Great Journals, Great Econometrics


Chang, Chia-Lin and McAleer, Michael and Oxley, Les (2011) Great Expectatrics: Great Papers, Great Journals, Great Econometrics. [ Documentos de Trabajo del Instituto Complutense de Análisis Económico; nº 14, 2011, ] (Unpublished)

Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial.


Official URL:


The paper discusses alternative Research Assessment Measures (RAM), with an emphasis on the Thomson Reuters ISI Web of Science database (hereafter ISI). Some analysis and comparisons are also made with data from the SciVerse Scopus database. The various RAM that are calculated annually or updated daily are defined and analysed, including the classic 2-year impact factor (2YIF), 2YIF without journal self citations (2YIF*), 5-year impact factor (5YIF), Immediacy (or zero-year impact factor (0YIF)), Impact Factor Inflation (IFI), Self-citation Threshold Approval Rating (STAR), Eigenfactor score, Article Influence, C3PO (Citation Performance Per Paper Online), h-index, Zinfluence, and PI-BETA (Papers Ignored - By Even The Authors). The RAM are analysed for 10 leading econometrics journals and 4 leading statistics journals. The application to econometrics can be used as a template for other areas in economics, for other scientific disciplines, and as a benchmark for newer journals in a range of disciplines. In addition to evaluating high quality research in leading econometrics journals, the paper also compares econometrics and statistics, alternative RAM, highlights the similarities and differences of the alternative RAM, finds that several RAM capture similar performance characteristics for the leading econometrics and statistics journals, while the new PI-BETA criterion is not highly correlated with any of the other RAM, and hence conveys additional information regarding RAM, highlights major research areas in leading journals in econometrics, and discusses some likely future uses of RAM, and shows that the harmonic mean of 13 RAM provides more robust journal rankings than relying solely on 2YIF.

Item Type:Working Paper or Technical Report
Additional Information:

The authors wish to thank Dennis Fok, Philip Hans Franses, Essie Maasoumi, Jan Magnus, and two referees for very helpful comments, suggestions and discussions.

Uncontrolled Keywords:Research assessment measures, impact factors, Immediacy, Eigenfactor, Article influence, Cited article influence, h-index, C3PO, Zinfluence, PI-BETA, IFI, STAR.
Subjects:Social sciences > Library science and documentation > Databases
Social sciences > Economics > Econometrics
Social sciences > Library science and documentation > Information retrieval
JEL:C43, C10, Z0
Series Name:Documentos de Trabajo del Instituto Complutense de Análisis Económico
ID Code:12732

Bergstrom C. (2007), Eigenfactor: Measuring the value and prestige of scholarly journals, C&RL News, 68, 314-316.

Bergstrom, C.T. and. West (2008), Assessing citations with the Eigenfactor™ metrics, Neurology, 71, 1850–1851.

Bergstrom, C.T., J.D. West and M.A. Wiseman (2008), The Eigenfactor™ metrics, Journal of Neuroscience, 28 (45), 11433–11434.

Chang, C.-L., M. McAleer and L. Oxley L. (2011), What makes a great journal great in economics? The singer not the song, Journal of Economic Surveys, 25(2), 326-361.

Fersht, A. (2009), The most influential journals: Impact factor and Eigenfactor, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106 (17), 6883-6884.

Franceschet, M. (2010), Journal influence factors, Journal of Informetrics, 4, 239-248.

Hirsch, J.E. (2005), An index to quantify an individual‟s scientific research output, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS), 102 (46), 16569–16572 (15 November 2005).

ISI Web of Science (2010), Journal Citation Reports, Essential Science Indicators, Thomson Reuters ISI.

SciVerse Scopus (2010) Content Coverage Guide, SciVerse Scopus.

Seglen, P.O. (1997), Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research, BMJ: British Medical Journal, 314 (7079), 498-502.

Deposited On:17 May 2011 10:07
Last Modified:17 Jun 2016 08:47

Repository Staff Only: item control page