The Impact Factor: Just the Facts

Abstract

Calculated each year by the Web of Science (Thomson Reuters), a journal’s impact factor (IF) foragivenyear isameasureof the frequency with which its recent articles are cited on average during that year.‘‘Recent’’refers to the two prior calendar years. Thus, Archives’ 2011 IF is the number of times that its 2009 and 2010articleswerecited in2011,dividedbythenumberofarticles the Archives published in 2009 and 2010. Although the IF is the best known metric for citation analysis, there are other measures, including the Immediacy Index (II) and the Cited Half-Life (CHL). The II is a measure of how frequently the journal’s ‘‘average article’’is cited the same year in which it is published. Thus, the II for a year is calculated as the number of times articles fromthat journalarecitedduringthatyear,dividedbythenumber of articles that journal published that year. The CHL is a measure of the longevityof thefrequencyofcitations toarticles in the journal, that is, forhowlongtheaveragearticlemaintains itscurrency. The CHL for a year is determined by the time required to account foracumulativetotalof50 %ofthatyear’scitationstothejournal. The scientometrics of scholarly impact is a specialty field that is worth studying, but I retain the view, as does Brody (2012), that the IF is still a pretty damn good metric. I had an IF fantasy for 2011. In the April 2010 issue of Archives, we published a number of review papers from the DSM-5 Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders Workgroup. I figured they would attract a lot of attention. So, my fantasy was that the IF for 2011 would‘‘soar’’to at least 4.0, which would impact mefarbetter thanaWhiteRussianorBaileys(whichisasaboutas good as it gets for me). Table 1showstheIFof thesexandgenderperiodicals,broadly defined, for the year 2011. Alas, the IF of Archives remained stable: at 3.66 in 2010 and 3.52 in 2011. I better stick to the White Russians for now. The meaning of the IF can be crudely gauged in comparative perspective: For 2011, of 2,943 Social Science journals,Archives was ranked 102nd (96th percentile). Of 109 journals classified as Psychology (Clinical), Archives was ranked 11th (90th percentile). Of 89 journals classified as Social Science, Interdisciplinary, Archives was ranked 1st. Not bad. In previous Editorials, I have observed that there are many sex and gender journals that are not given an IF by the Web of Science .Colleaguespointedout tomethatSexualities,asocialconstructionist periodical, has now been issued an IF (it’s about time, since it was first published in 1998). Its 2011 IF of .63 nested it inbetween GLQ: A Journal of Gay and Lesbian Studies and FeminismandPsychology.That seems tobe the rightfit (ormaybe the left). We appear to be in an era of a mini-boom of new sex and gender journals. In 2012, Journal of Language and Sexuality was launched. The American Psychological Association’s Division 44 has announced the launching of Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity (Editor, John Gonsiorek, Ph.D). The publisher Mary Ann Liebert announced the launching of LGBT Health (Editor, William Byne, M.D., Ph.D.), and Duke University Press announced the launching of TSQ: Transgender Studies Quarterly (Editors, Paisley Currah and Susan Stryker). On the listserv SEXNET, some colleagues expressed worry that thefield isalreadysaturatedwith toomanyjournals.Myview ismoreempirical.ToquotePresidentBush:‘‘Bring‘emon.’’Asto thesaturationproblem,considerthewise,eloquentwordsofDonald Rumsfield:‘‘As we know, there are known knowns. There are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns. That is to say, we know there are some things we do K. J. Zucker (&) Gender Identity Service, Child, Youth, and Family Program, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, 80 Workman Way, Toronto, ON M6J 1H4, Canada e-mail: Ken.Zucker@camh.ca