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

Reports an error in the original article by J. Rotton et al (American Psychologist, 1993Aug], Vol 488], 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)