Long-Term vs. Short-Term Impact: Part II

Date: July 6, 1998Cumulative Impact Factors In the February 2, 1998 issue of The Scientist (12[3]:11-12), we published the list of the 100 highest-impact journals for the period 1981-95. This study emphasized long-term cumulative impact rather than short-term or current impact. The main focus of these data were the articles published in 1981-82. We chose these two years so that 15 years of cumulative citations could be compiled. To many of our readers, these years must seem remote. But for some

Eugene Garfield
Jul 5, 1998

Date: July 6, 1998Cumulative Impact Factors
In the February 2, 1998 issue of The Scientist (12[3]:11-12), we published the list of the 100 highest-impact journals for the period 1981-95. This study emphasized long-term cumulative impact rather than short-term or current impact. The main focus of these data were the articles published in 1981-82. We chose these two years so that 15 years of cumulative citations could be compiled. To many of our readers, these years must seem remote. But for some of our readers, our study did not go far enough. The editor of Arthritis and Rheumatism wondered why his journal was not included. The simple answer is that his journal was the 101st on our list. So we have rectified that "omission" by including below the next 100 journals in the ranked database.

All these data were extracted from the Journals Performance Indicators file of the Institute...

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

Receive full access to digital editions of The Scientist, as well as TS Digest, feature stories, more than 35 years of archives, and much more!
Already a member?