Annals of Library Science and Documentation 1989,36(3),69-74 THREE NEW BIBLIOMETRIC PARAMETERS TO RERANK MICROBIOLOGY PERIODICALS I N SENGUPTA Scientist-in-Charge Library & Documentation Unit Indian Institute of Chemical Biology Calcutta-700032 Citation study is now considered as one of the au then tic tools for selection of scientific periodicals. However, ranking journals by traditional method of citation counting is not free from limitations. The paper shows ways and means to eliminate these pitfalls by application of three new bibliometric parameters introduced by Sengupta earlier. It is stressed that these new parameters are capable' of making a ranking list of any scientific discipline more authentic and needbased as they arrange journals according to their scientific interest in relation to total number of articles published; compactness of information content in a scientific journal; and scientific value of the publishe papers in relation to compactness of presentation. As a case study these parameters have been applied to the first ten core journals of microbiology identified earlier. The paper presents a revised ranking order of these journals and the importance of this new ranking order is discussed from the point of view of its utility to users. INTRODUCTION Scientific serials have many peculiarities. Their date of inception, frequency of publication, bulk, format, scientific value of articles, compactness of information content etc., vary from journal to journal. Thus the positions of journals in any ranking list based on the traditional method of citation counting may not be the true index of their practical value and consequently may be mislcading if no built-in correction system for the above mentioned variables is made while ranking scientific periodicals. Thus, all the earlier and recent ranking tables Vol 36 No 3 Sept 1989 based on citation counting from primary or secondary source journals (e.g. Gross [1] and "Gross, Gross [2] and Woodford, Mengert [3], Gregory [4 L Henkle [5], Brodman [6"], Smith [7], Fussler [8], Coile [9], Brown [10], Raisig [11], Craig (12], Sengupta [13-17], Steward [18], Chakraborthy [19], Lawani [20], Singh [21], etc.), on different scientific disciplines need suitable correction. It is felt that suitable measures should be taken to correct the bulk of material published in a year. Further, in order to make ranking tables more purposeful, practical, and accurate, journals of these tables should be arranged according to the scientific value of the published papers with a weightage for compactness of presentation. Keeping this in mind Sengupta [22] devised three new bibliometric parameters which are capable of assessing scientific journals of any ranking list from the practical point of view and he applied these parameters earlier to rerank periodicals in the field of biochemistry. We now propose to use these parameters for proper evaluation of the periodicals listed in Sengupta 's [15] international ranking list of microbiology. As a case study, we are applying them only to the first 10 microbiology periodicals of Sengupta [15]. We believe that the corrected list will arrange the most useful journals for microbiologists in respect of their scientific value and compactness of information content. METHODOLOGY The same hibliometric parameters namely, (D/A), (CIA) and (D/C) have been used as in the case of biochemistry to evaluate the ranked periodicals of microbiology. The three parameters we devised earlier are : 61)
SENGUPTA i) D/A: Scientific interest of a journal in relation to the total number of articles published; ii) CIA: Compactness of the information content in a scientific periodical; and iii) D/C: The scientific value of the papers in relation to compactness of presentation. As usual, in these three newly coined para meters : A stands for total number of articles published in a journal during a particular year; B stands for total number of pages published by a journal during a particular year; C denotes total number of words published in that journal during that particular year, and D is the total number of bibliographic citations noted in favour of that journal from the source journal(s) during that particular year. We believe that among the three parameters the third one from all considerations is by far the best criterion to identify the most important core journals from users' point of view. The procedure of Sengupta [22] was followed to calculate the numerical values of A, B, C and D. Now since all the variables A, C, and Dare known, the numerical values of the parameters DI A, CIA, and D/C can be easily calculated. These parameters will help to analyse the number of citations in relation to the size of the journal and the average length of the papers published in a journal, by eliminating the bias due to the bulk of research periodicals which is unrelated to the scientific value of individual papers published in it. Such bias is inevitable in ranking lists prepared on the basis of numerical counting of citations of individual periodicals. 70 DISCUSSION The first vertical column of Table 1 enumerates 10 ranked titles of microbiology. In the subsequent vertical columns we have shown the numericai values of A, B, C and D in respect of these 10 periodicals along with their respective number of citations noted for 1969. Our main objective is to apply these three parameters separately on these titles to find out their relative importance and to rerank them according to actual scientific interest of a journal in relation to the total number of papers published (D/A), the compactness of the information content (CIA) and the scientific value of the paper in relation to compactness of presentation (D/C). The value DI A is an index of the scientific value of the papers published in a journal, corrected for the bulk of material published in a year, which varies considerably from journal to journal. When titles in the uncorrected ranking list (Table 1) are reranked according to the value of DI A, the revised list puts the journals in order of their scientific value without bias due to bulk. Thus from Table 2 it will be seen that the proportion of papers of scientific value in microbiology, as judged by frequency of citations per paper published is highest for Virology (ranked 3rd in Table 1) followed by ]. gen. Microbiol. and J. Bact. (ranked 8th and 1st in Table 1 respectively). But the margin between these three journals is very narrow. Thus if we rerank Sengupta's first 10 ranked journals in the field of microbiology the reranking order according to parameter Df A will be as shown in Table 2. It is interesting to note that when guided by this parameter the first three positions go exclusively to microbiology journals. This conforms to expectation as each of these three journals is considered as one of the best media of communication for the working microbiologists. The reason for 'Virology' toping the list, perhaps, is the present predominant interest in molecular biology and virology being a discipline basic to present experimental work in molecular biology. Similarly, the high positions of ]. molec. BioI. undoubtedly reflects the new directions of interest in present-day biological Ann Lib Sci Doc
NEW BIBLIOMETRIC PARAMETERS Table 1 The First Ten Periodicals of Sengupta's Ranking List of Microbiology '" with Corresponding Values of A, B, C and D Rank Name of the journal Number of Total Total Number of papej1l number number citations published of pages of words noted for during the 1969 yenr A Ii C 1) J. Bact. Vols.97 100, 1969 833 5272 2699264 491 2 Proc, natn. Acad. Sci., U.S.A. Vol. 62 64,1969 S97 4100 1435000 196 3 Virology Vols.37 39,1969 306 2356 883500 ]92 4 Nature, Lond. Vois. 221.224, 1969 2297 5317. 3349710 114 5 J. molec. BioI. Vols.39-46,1%9 3115 4671 1050975 164 6 J. bioi. Chern. Vol. 244,1969 902 6708 3823560 138 7 Biochim, biophys. Acta Vols. 171.195,1969 1878 14522 4066160 72 8 J. gen. Microbiol. VoIs.55 59,1969 232 2153 734173 139 9 Biochem. biophys. Res. Commun. Vols. 34 37, 1969 592 3922 686350 109 10 Science, N.Y. Vols. 163 166, 1969 1209 6057 369-i770 77 ----------------------------------------------------------- -This ranking order was based on total citations collected for the year 1968, 1969 and 1970. 'i/ Table 2 Reranked Order of First Ten Journals in the Fiela of Mirobiology according to Parameter DIA Reranked Name of the journal Number of Number of Number of order papers citations citations published noted for per paper during the 1969 year A n 1)tA 1 Virology 306 192 0.627 2 ]. gen. Microbiol. 2:12 139 0.599 3 J. Bact. 833 4')} 0.589 4 J. molee. BioI. 385 164-0.426 5 Proc. natn. Acad. Sci., U.S.A. 597 196 0.328 6 Biochem. biophys. Res. Commun. 592 109 0.184 7 J. bioi. Chern 902 1:18 0.153 8 Science, N.Y. 1209 77 0.064 9 Nature, Lond. 2297 114 0.050 10 Biochim. biophys. Acta 187U 72 0.0311 -----------------------------------------------------~------ Vol 36 No 3 Sept 1989 71
SENGUPTA research. When judged by this parameter, the information content of scientific value for the journal Biochim. biophys. Acta is the lowest: an indication perhaps of its undue bulk. However, it may be mentioned here that this parameter may be misleading when applied to multidisciplinary general science journals like Nature, Lond., Proc. natn. Acad. Sci., U.S.A. and Science, N. Y., with broader scientific coverage, since the formula which we have devised for this parameter has no built in correction for the variable proportion of papers of non-microbiological interest in such periodicals. Therefore, it follows that the scientific value of paperli on microbiology published in these three multidisciplinary general science journals is even considerably greater than what has appeared in Table 2. It has been stated that the compactness of information is inversely related to the value of CI A. Calculating the value of CIA from Table 1, it is seen that the compactness-of-informationcontent Biochem. biophys. Res. Commun. ranks highest. The aim and objective with which this journal was launched, namely, publishing signi-: ficant results with least possible delay, sufficiently justify its occupying the highest position when judged by this parameter. Table 3 provides the.reranked order of the first ten journals according to the paramter compactness-ofinformation-content. The third parameter D/C assesses a journal according to the scientific value of the papers published, with a weightage introduced for compactness of presentation. Among all the three parameters introduced by us, we believe this Table 3 Reranked Order of First Ten Journals in the Field of Mirobiology according to Parameter CIA Reranked order Name of the journal Number of papers published during the year A Total number of words C Average length of paper m words CIA 1 Biochem. biophys, Res. Commun. 592 686350 1159.4 2 Nature, Lond. 2297 3349710 1458.3 3 Biochim. biophys. Acta 1878 4066160 2165.2 4 Proc. natn. Acad. Sci., U.S.A. 597 1435000 2403.7 5 ]. molec. BioI. 385 1050975 2729.8 6 Virology 306 883500 2887.3 7 Science, N.Y. 1209 3694770 3056.1 8 J. gen. Microbioi. 232 734173 3164.5 9 J. Bact. 833 2699264 3240.4 10 ]. bioi. Chern. 902 3823;-)60 4239.0 --------------- -------------------- ----------------- ------- 72 Ann Lib Sci Doc
NEW BIBLIOMETRIC PARAMETERS one will provide the best index of value of a scientific journal to research workers in the field of microbiology, and therefore will also prove to be the best guide to selection of journals for subscription. This parameter has been conveniently obtained by simultaneous application of both criteria - proportion of scientifically valuable papers (DI A) and compactness of information content (CIA) i.e. DI A -7- CIA = D/C. The order of the first 10 periodicals of Table 1 after reranking on the basis of the parameter D/C has been shown in Table 4. From Table 4 it will be seen that when parameter D/C is applied, Virology again ranks highest followed by J. gen. Microbiol. and I Bact., the three most prestigious conventional research periodicals in the field of microbiology. Papers published in the first 10 journals reflect the major trends of microbiological research. These journals also appear to be the main international media of microbiological communications reflecting the progress of microbiological knowledge more accurately and purposefully than any other journals on the subject. It is therefore felt that all working microbiologists should scan these journals in order to keep themselves abreast of the' current trends of microbiological research. The list, should also serve as an authentic tool to help the librarians and information scientists in selecting journals for subscription and also for documentation work. This list will also ensure for them the Table 4 Reranleed Order of the First Ten Journals in the Field of Microbiology according to Parameter DIG Reranked Name of the journal Average Number of No. of citations order length citations in relation to of paper per page overall size of in words published volumes published during the y:ear (CIA) (D/A) (*D/C x lo4) 1 Virology 2887.3 0.627 2.2 2 J. gen. Microbiol. 3164.5 0.599 1.9 3 J. Bact. 3240.4 0.589 1.8 4 Biochem. biophys. Res. Commun. 1159.4 0.184 1.6 4 J. molec. BioI. 2729.8 0.426 1.6 6 Proc. natn. Acad. Sci., U.S.A. 2403.7 0.328 1.4 7 J. bioi. Chern. 4239.0 0.153 0.4 8 Nature, Lond. 1458.3 0.050 0.3 9 Biochim. biophys, Acta 2165.2 0.038 0.2 9 Science, N.Y. 3056.1 0.064 0.2 Total: lo *For value of A, Band C see Table 1. '.. Vol 36 No 3 Sept 1989
SENGUPTA optimum utilisation of their library budget for the benefit of their clientele, and in preparation of documentation lists for circulation. It is needless to point that among these three parameters priority in acquisition may be given to the parameter Die as explained earlier in the text. Further, this bibliometric analysis is a case study only for the first 10 ranked journals in the field of microbiology. The same procedure may be applied to other ranked periodicals of microbiology and complete ranked list of journals in order of diminishing importance, can be obtained conveniently. REFERENCES 1. Gross, P L K and Gross, EM: College libraries and chemical education. Science, N.Y. 1927, 66, 385-9. 2. Gross, P L K and Woodford, A C: Serial literature used by American geologists. Science, N.Y. 1931, 73, 360:4. 3. Mengert, W F: The periodicals on endocrinology sex. Endocrinology 1934,18, 421-2. 4. Gregory, J: An evaluation of medical periodicals. Bull. med. Lib. Ass. 1937, 26, 172-88. 5. Henkle, H N: The periodical literature of biochemistry. Bull. med.libr. Ass. 1938, 27, 139-47. 147. 6. Brodman, E: Choosing physiology journals. Bull. med. Libr. Ass. 1944, 32,479-83. 7. Smith, M M: The selection of chemical engineering periodicals in college libraries. College Res.Lib. 1944,5,217-27. 8. Fussier, M H: Characteristics of the research literature used by chemists and physicists in the U.S. Part 'I' and 'II'. Lib. Quart. 1949,. 19, 19-35,119-43. 9. Coile, R C: Periodical literature for electrical engi- I~v_rs. J. Doc. 1952,8,209-26. 10. Brown, C H: Scientific serials: characterization and list of most cited periodicals in mathematics, physics, chemistry, geology, physiology, botany, zoolrgy, and entomology. Association of College and Reference Libraries (ACRL) Monograph No.16, Chicago, pp.1-15, 1956, U.S.A. 11. Raising, L M: Mathematical evaluation of the scientific serial. Science, N.Y. 1960, 131, 1417-19. 12. Craig, J E G Jr: Characteristics of the use of geology literature. College Res. Lib. 1969, 30, 230-6. 13. Sengupta, IN: Ranking of periodicals in the field of biomedical sciences from the Indian scientists' point of view. Analysis of data for 1959-68. UNESCO Bull. Libr. 1970, 24, l4s-52. 14. Sengupta, I N: Choosing physiology periodicals: A recent study of the growth of its literature. Ann. Lib. ScL Doc. 1973, 20, 39-57. 15. Sengupta, I N: Choosing microbiology periodicals: Study of the growth of literature in the field. Ann. Lib. ScL Doc. 1974,21,95-111. 16. Sengupta, I N: Choosing pharmacology periodicals: Study of the growth of literature in the field. Ann. Lib. ScL Doc. 1974, 21, 1-~1. 17. Sengupta, IN: The growth of biophysical literature. Scientometrics 1985,8,."365-7-5.. 18. Stewart, J L: The literature of politics A citation analysis. Int. Lib. Rev. 1970,2,329-53. 19. Chakraborthy, A R: Citations chracteristics of marine geology. Ann. Lib. Sci. Doc. 1971, 18,88-91. 20. Lawani, S M: Periodical literature of tropical and subtropical agriculture. UNESCO Bull. Lib. 1972, 26,88-93. 21. Singh, R S: Ranking of periodicals in chemistry from the point of view of Indian scientists. Ann. Lib. ScL Doc. 1974,21,55-67. 22. Sengupta, I N:Three new parameters in bibliometric research and their application to rerank periodicals in the field of biochemistry. Scientometrics 1986, 10, 235-42. 7-1. Ann Lib Sci Doc