The Role of Citations in Warwick’s
Strategy and Improving Them
Nicola Owen (Academic Registrar)
Professor Mark Smith (PVC Research:
Science and Medicine)
Introduction





What are citations ?
Citation indices & impact factors
ISI Highly Cited Researchers
Why improve citations ?
How do we improve citations ?
What are Citations ?
 A citation is a reference to a book, article or
web page or other published item that can be
uniquely identified.
 Citations are used in scholarly works to give
credit to or acknowledge the influence of
previous works.
 Thomson ISI, part of Thomson-Reuters Corp.
is the World’s leading bibliometric data
compiler. ISI created by Eugene Garfield
Citation Indices
 SCI – Science Citation Index
 SSCI – Social Science Citation Index
 AHCI - Arts and Humanities Citation Index
Impact Factor
E.g. Journal impact factor for 2003….
A = the number of times articles published in 2001-2
were cited in indexed journals during 2003
B = the number of "citable items" (usually articles,
reviews, letters, proceedings or notes; not usually
editorials, comments and letters-to-the-Editor)
published in 2001-2
2003 impact factor = A/B
The highest cited journals
Rank
Journal Title
Total
Cites
Impact
Articles
Factor
1
J BIOL CHEM
410,903
5.808
4336
2
NATURE
390,690 26.681
962
3
P NATL ACAD SCI USA
371,057
9.643
3306
4
SCIENCE
361,389 30.028
885
5
J AM CHEM SOC
275,769
7.696
3256
6
PHYS REV LETT
268,454
7.072
3758
7
PHYS REV B
212,714
3.107
5631
8
NEW ENGL J MED
177,505 51.296
303
9
ASTROPHYS J
162,136
6.119
2707
10
J CHEM PHYS
157,334
3.166
2811
11
APPL PHYS LETT
140,050
3.977
6153
12
LANCET
133,932 25.800
301
13
CELL
132,528 29.194
352
14
CIRCULATION
126,019 10.940
682
15
J IMMUNOL
117,464
6.293
1846
16
CANCER RES
112,911
7.656
1493
17
J GEOPHYS RES
111,451
2.800
2251
18
BLOOD
108,180 10.370
1189
19
J NEUROSCI
103,022
7.453
1415
20
ANGEW CHEM INT EDIT 102,854 10.232
1556
Consider impact by field
Economics
Rank
Journal Title
Biochemistry & Molecular Biology
Impact
Factor
Rank
Journal Title
Impact
Factor
1
J ECON LIT
4.667
1
ANNU REV BIOCHEM
36.525
2
Q J ECON
3.938
2
CELL
29.194
3
J ACCOUNT ECON
3.360
3
NAT MED
28.588
4
J ECON GROWTH
3.240
4
ANNU REV BIOPH BIOM 16.921
5
J POLIT ECON
3.194
5
PLOS BIOL
14.101
6
J ECON PERSPECT
2.833
6
MOL CELL
14.033
7
WORLD BANK RES OBSER
2.700
7
TRENDS BIOCHEM SCI
13.863
8
J ECON GEOGR
2.519
8
NAT CHEM BIOL
12.409
9
J FINANC ECON
2.494
9
PROG LIPID RES
12.235
10
ECONOMETRICA
2.402
10
MOL PSYCHIATR
11.804
Consider impact by field
 We have seen that citation rates and impact
vary by field and sub-field of research
 We must set citations metrics in context
 Citations less relevant in the arts and
humanities
Highly Cited Researchers
 Thomson ISIHighlyCited.com
 21 broad subject categories in life sciences,
medicine, physical sciences, engineering and social
sciences.
 Individuals listed are the most highly cited within
each category for the period 1981-1999, comprise
less than 0.5 % of all publishing researchers - an
extraordinary accomplishment.
 Does not include the arts & humanities
 Universities recognised as the best in the World
have many HiCi researchers
Nobel Laureates…
Eugene Garfield on Nobel Laureates…
 they publish five times the average number of
papers
 their work is cited 30 to 50 times the average
 they will invariably publish several Citation
Classics
 most have high h-Indexes
 many also appear on ISI’s HighlyCited index
We can’t all be Nobel Laureates though !
Where Are We Now – Highly Cited?
Comparative positions include (SJTU rankings in
brackets):
[2] Cambridge University = 49
[10] Oxford University = 40
[23] Imperial College = 29
[26] UCL = 23
[62] Bristol = 16
[50] Manchester = 14
[90] Birmingham = 7
[246] Warwick = 5
[1] Harvard University = 80
[3] Stanford University = 93
[4] UC Berkley = 82
[5] MIT = 74
[8] Princeton University = 60
[11] Yale University = 34
[12] Cornell University = 51
[85] Brown University =15
Citation impact for Institutions in 5 year
overlapping periods
9.0
9.0
8.0
8.0
7.0
7.0
6.0
6.0
5.0
5.0
4.0
4.0
3.0
3.0
2.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
5 Year Period
DURHAM UNIV-all fields
UNIV LEICESTER-all fields
UNIV OXFORD-all fields
UNIV BIRMINGHAM-all fields
UNIV MANCHESTER-all fields
UNIV WARWICK-all fields
UNIV CAMBRIDGE-all fields
UNIV NOTTINGHAM-all fields
UNIV YORK-all fields
Why might this be?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Young institution?
Young medical school?
Culture of playing safe?
Insufficient international networks?
Lack of awareness
Publishing cultures?
Some disciplines and sub-disciplines cite more
than others.
Why are we doing this?
• Strategically:
Boost research quality by regular benchmarking
to world, rather than UK, standards.
• Reputation (underselling ourselves) international
esteem
THES World Rankings citations per faculty (20%)
• Future funding
– Research Assessment of Science, Technology,
Engineering & Medicine (STEM) subjects from
2009 (likely to be weighted 30%)
What can we do?
• Primary focus on research quality across Warwick
(i.e. not just a science/social science issue)
• Citations is one measure – draw up measures in
discipline context
• Need to start measuring
– What’s your own h-index?
– What do Warwick academics publish each year?
How do we improve citations ?
 Attempt to publish in top journals for the field
or sub-field of research
 Don’t take the comfortable option of submitting
articles first to middle ranking journals
 Be prepared to face rejection
 Achieve maximum publicity for your research
 Ensure that the correct address is used !
What can we do? (cont.)
• Supporting early career staff
–
–
–
–
–
Taking risks
Mentoring
Identifying journals/publishers
Co-editing
Networking
• Open access publishing? (Southampton
experience)