Impact factors of Journals in Sport and Exercise Science and Medicine for 2011.
|Abstract:||Sports Medicine has resumed its former status in our disciplines as the journal with the highest impact factor (5.1). Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition made the most spectacular entry/gain (up from an unofficial 0.5 last year to 2.7). Other gains in excess of 70% from last year were achieved by Clinics in Sports Medicine (now 2.4), International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism (2.2), and Journal of Leisure Research (1.5). Noteworthy journals making gains of 30-70% were British Journal of Sports Medicine (3.5), Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport (2.5), and International Journal of Sports Medicine (2.4). High flyers making smaller gains were Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise (4.1), Exercise and Sport Sciences Reviews (3.8), and Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports (2.8). Noteworthy small improvements were made by Journal of Applied Physiology (4.2), Journal of Sports Sciences (1.9), and Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research (1.8), while there were negligible changes for the two relevant series of American Journal of Physiology (4.7, 3.9), American Journal of Sports Medicine (3.8), Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology (2.8), and Journal of Biomechanics (2.5). Notable falls of more than 10% were recorded by Journal of Athletic Training (2.0), The Sport Psychologist (1.1), and Journal of Sports Science and Medicine (<1.0). International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance was inexplicably omitted from the official report but has a respectable unofficial factor (1.2). A scheme to make impact factors obsolete by publishing research that conforms with peer-approved proposals seems unlikely to get started. KEYWORDS: citation, publication, research.|
Exercise (Physiological aspects)
Sports medicine (Physiological aspects)
|Author:||Hopkins, Will G.|
|Publication:||Name: Sportscience Publisher: Internet Society for Sport Science Audience: Academic Format: Magazine/Journal Subject: Health Copyright: COPYRIGHT 2011 Internet Society for Sport Science ISSN: 1174-9210|
|Issue:||Date: Annual, 2011 Source Volume: 15|
|Product:||Product Code: 2721000 Periodicals NAICS Code: 51112 Periodical Publishers SIC Code: 2721 Periodicals|
Update Sept 2011: International Journal of Sport Science and
Coaching has just been awarded its first impact factor, a respectable
This article represents my annual summary of the latest impact factors of journals in the disciplines of exercise and sport science and medicine. The Institute for Scientific Information (ISI, a subsidiary of Thomson Reuters) compiles the impact factors and publishes them as Journal Citation Reports each year around June-July. You will need an institutional subscription to access this and other resources at ISI Web of Knowledge.
Table 1 lists the factors of our journals in alphabetical order, while the abstract summarizes changes that are color-coded in the table. The meaning of the impact factor is summarized in the legend of the table, but for an in-depth explanation and critique of the impact factor, start with an earlier article in this series.
Once again there is no impact factor for the International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance in ISI's report, even though this journal has qualified for inclusion for the last three years. As I have a special interest in this journal, I used ISI's database to do the calculation. In 2010 there were 98 citations in all journals to the 82 full articles published in IJSPP in 2008 and 2009. The impact factor is therefore 98/82 = 1.2, a respectable value for a specialty journal in only its sixth year.
In each of these annual updates I try to introduce something new or little known about scientific publishing. Last year it was the concept of post-publication peer review, according to which practically every article gets published, and the value of the article becomes apparent from the non-anonymous comments posted and from the citations the article ultimately gets in other articles. One year on, the website of the publisher promoting this approach still does not feature any journals devoted to sports medicine or science, and I doubt whether there will ever be any. With so much material now available on line, researchers need some kind of prepublication peer review to winnow out the chaff of studies that should never have been done in the first place.
Which brings me to the new idea for this article, an idea I promoted on the Sportscience mailing list late last year: peer review of proposals for studies, followed by practically guaranteed publication of studies that conform to their approved proposals. This approach to scientific publication would likely reduce publication bias and solve other problems arising from journals' obsession with inflating their impact factors, from abuse of statistical significance, and from rejection of good research by reviewers who should know better. It turned out that the Lancet already offers this option for researchers proposing clinical trials, although relatively few have used it in the ~10 years it has been available. I made a serious attempt to get a group of my colleagues interested in establishing a journal based this idea, but in the end even I had doubts when it became apparent that we would have to charge authors at least US$1000 per article to cover costs, and substantially more than $1000 unless we did much of the work ourselves without compensation. I have purchased numerous domain names that would be appropriate for the kind of archive of science I had in mind, so if anyone has time or money to pursue this idea further, please contact me.
Published July 2011. [C] 2011
Will G Hopkins
Sport and Recreation, AUT University, Auckland 0627, New Zealand. Email. Reviewer: David Pyne, Department of
Physiology, Australian Institute of Sport, Canberra, Australia.
|Gale Copyright:||Copyright 2011 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.|