Evaluating the correlation between different impact indicators for library and information science journals: Comparing the journal citation reports and scopus

Abstract

Library and information science (LIS) scholars are increasingly aware of the ranking of LIS journals in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) and Scopus when deciding where to publish, especially scholars who belong to universities that rely on these rankings when making hiring or promotion decisions. However, it is not known which index presents the most appropriate indicator for the LIS discipline and whether Scopus ranking is a possible alternative to the impact factor (IF). This study analysed the 2018 indicators for 58 LIS journals that are included in both Clarivate Analytics' JCR and Elsevier's Scopus databases. The bivariate correlations were calculated using the Spearman correlation coefficient. Then, to examine the interchangeability among the selected indicators, each pair of correlations was compared using Fisher's R to Z transformation formula. The results showed that all bivariate correlations are positive and strong. The highest correlations are between the Total Cites and Eigenfactor Score (ES) (R _s = 0.962, R ² = 0.925) and between the IF and CiteScore (R _s = 0.952, R ² = 0.906). There were 71 combinations with P‐value >0.05, showing that there is no significant difference between the bivariate correlation, indicating interchangeability between those pairs. The best indicator which can be used interchangeably with the IF is the CiteScore. It is evident that, to measure the scientific quality of LIS journals, all stakeholders should take into consideration the correlations among the various indicators. Furthermore, they can rely on the CiteScore as an adequate alternative to the IF.