"Citation impact, rejection rates, and journal value": Correction.

Reports an error in the original article by J. Rotton et al (American Psychologist, 1993[Aug], Vol 48[8], 911–912). Table 1 listed the journal Psychological Research twice, and the journals Cognition and Child Study Journal were omitted. The mean SSCI for applied journals in Table 1 should have been 1.17. Multiple rather than squared multiple correlations were reported for rejection rates. Area and type of journal explained 48% of variance in rejection rates, and the F ratio for predicting citations should have been F(9,28)?=?14.82. On page 912, the mean SSCI for experimental journals should have been 1.51. (The following abstract of this article originally appeared in record 1994-03368-001.) Comments on L. C. Buffardi and J. A. Nichols's (1981) list of rejection rates for psychological journals and further examines the relation between rejection rates, citation impact, and journal value. It was found that 69% of the variance in rejection rates was explained by area and type of journal. As Buffardi and Nichols reported, rejection rates were higher for APA than for non-APA journals (80.27% vs 65.37%), and citation indices were higher for APA than for non-APA journals (2.63 vs 0.91)… (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Citation impact, acceptance rate, and APA journals.

Investigated the role that factors such as journal circulation and acceptance rate play in relation to citation impact (CTI). CTI was negatively related to acceptance rate and positively related to circulation, consistent with the construct of CTI as a measure of journal quality. CTI was highest for moderate publication lag and had substantial stability over time. Compared to non-American Psychological Association (APA) journals, APA journals had significantly higher CTI in both 1977 and 1978, higher circulation, and lower acceptance rates. CTI is probably the best single measure of journal quality currently available. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Citation rates and the quality of Canadian psychology departments.

In a search for maximally valid indicators of academic departmental quality, 17 measures tapping 6 dimensions were examined in a multitrait multimethod manner with regard to their psychometric and other properties. Citations and graduates placed provided the best index of departmental quality. (French summary) (18 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Acute hepatic allograft rejection: incidence, risk factors, and impact on outcome

Hepatic allograft rejection remains an important problem following liver transplantation, and, indeed, complications related to the administration of immunosuppressive therapy remain a predominant cause of posttransplantation morbidity and mortality. The Liver Transplantation Database (LTD) was used to study a cohort of 762 consecutive adult liver transplantation recipients and determined the incidence, timing, and risk factors for acute rejection. We also evaluated the impact of histological severity of rejection on the need for additional immunosuppressive therapy and on patient and graft survival. Four hundred ninety (64%) of the 762 adult liver transplantation recipients developed at least one episode of rejection during a median follow-up period of 1,042 days (range, 336-1,896 days), most of which occurred during the first 6 weeks after transplantation. Multivariate analysis revealed that recipient age, serum creatinine, aspartate transaminase (AST) level, presence of edema, donor/recipient HLA-DR mismatch, cold ischemic time, and donor age were independently associated with the time to acute rejection. An interesting observation was that the histological severity of rejection was an important prognosticator: the use of antilymphocyte preparations was higher, and the time to death or retransplantation was shorter, for patients with severe rejection. Findings from this study will assist in decision-making for the use of immunosuppressive regimens and call into question whether complete elimination of all rejection or alloreactivity is a desirable goal in liver transplantation.     

Ratings of psychology journals compared to objective measures of journal impact.

Compared the K. C. Mace and H. D. Warner (1973) list of chairpersons' ratings of psychological journal reputation and an objective measure of journal eminence. No close correspondence was found between ratings and citation counts for journals. For chairpersons, professional reputation of a journal is evaluated by criteria other than its visibility in the literature. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The citation impact factor: Another dubious index of journal quality.

Maintains that there is little or no evidence that citation frequencies are useful for evaluating psychologists other than to identify those whose names are household words in the discipline. It is also stressed that the citation impact factor penalizes journals that publish articles that are not cited: The journal's impact factor is likely to be reduced by its publication of articles that do not conform to current customs, fads, and fashions. (13 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Citation analysis and literature trends.

Comments on an article by T. R. Elliott and E. K. Byrd (see record 1987-23075-001), in which the authors conducted a citation analysis of articles in Rehabilitation Psychology, Volumes 27-29. They claimed to identify influential authors and publications useful for training and research in rehabilitation psychology. Their method of citation analysis, however, appears to have distorted their results. Crisp discusses the problems with their methodology, and makes suggestions for using a different citation method, using more than three volumes of the journal, and including other journals in the analysis. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Summary report of journal operations, 2005.

Provides a summary report of journal operations for 2005. This summary is compiled from the 2005 annual reports of the Council of Editors and from Central Office records. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Summary report of journal operations, 1996.

Presents a summary of journal operations compiled from the 1996 annual reports of the Council of Editors and from Central Office records. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Summary report of journal operations, 1993.

Presents a summary of journal operations compiled from the 1993 annual reports of the Council of Editors and from Central Office records. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Summary report of journal operations, 2001.

Provides summary reports of both the journal operations of the American Psychological Association (APA) and a summary report of APA Division journal operations for the year 2001. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Summary report of journal operations, 2009.

This summary of journal operations is compiled from the 2009 annual reports of the Council of Editors and from Central Office records. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Summary report of journal operations, 2010.

Presents the summary report of APA journal operations for 2010. This summary is compiled from the 2010 annual reports of the Council of Editors and from Central Office records. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)