[Paper Review] Measuring the influence of a journal using impact and diffusion factors

S. A. Sanni, A. N. Zainab|arXiv (Cornell University)|Jan 23, 2013

scientometrics and bibliometrics research15 references3 citations

TL;DR

This paper proposes and applies impact and diffusion factors—specifically Journal Diffusion Factor (JDF) and Relative Diffusion Factor (RDF)—to measure the influence of the Medical Journal of Malaysia (MJM) from 2004 to 2008. Using citation data from Google Scholar and publication data from MyAis, it finds that diachronous JDF (0.46–1.98) is significantly higher than synchronous JDF (0.057–0.14), indicating broader long-term citation reach, while RDF values show a negative correlation with citation counts, suggesting limitations in measuring highly cited works.

ABSTRACT

Presents the result of the calculated IS! equivalent Impact Factor, Relative Diffusion Factor (RDF), and Journal Diffusion Factor (JDF) for articles published in the Medical Journal of Malaysia (MJM) between the years 2004 and 2008 in both their synchronous and diachronous versions. The publication data are collected from MyAis (Malaysian Abstracting & Indexing system) while the citation data are collected from Google Scholar. The values of the synchronous JDF ranges from 0.057 - 0.14 while the diachronous JDF ranges from 0.46 - 1.98. The high diachronous JDF is explained by a relatively high number of different citing journals against the number of publications. This implies that the results of diachronous JDF is influenced by the numbers of publications and a good comparison may be one of which the subject of analysis have similar number of publications and citations period. The yearly values of the synchronous RDF vary in the range of 0.66 - 1.00 while diachronous RDF ranges from 0.62 - 0.88. The result shows that diachronous RDF is negatively correlated with the number of citations, resulting in a low RDF value for highly cited publication years. What this implies in practice is that the diffusion factors can be calculated for every additional year at any journal level of analysis. This study demonstrates that these indicators are valuable tools that help to show development of journals as it changes through time.

Motivation & Objective

• To evaluate the influence of the Medical Journal of Malaysia (MJM) using novel metrics beyond traditional impact factors.
• To assess the validity and sensitivity of Journal Diffusion Factor (JDF) and Relative Diffusion Factor (RDF) in capturing temporal citation dynamics.
• To investigate how publication and citation patterns affect the calculation and interpretation of diffusion-based metrics.
• To demonstrate the utility of impact and diffusion factors as longitudinal indicators of journal development.

Proposed method

• Calculates synchronous and diachronous versions of Journal Diffusion Factor (JDF) using citation counts from Google Scholar and publication counts from MyAis.
• Computes Relative Diffusion Factor (RDF) as a normalized measure of citation spread across different journals.
• Analyzes data from MJM articles published between 2004 and 2008, distinguishing between immediate (synchronous) and long-term (diachronous) citation patterns.
• Uses yearly citation and publication data to compute metrics across multiple time points, enabling longitudinal comparison.
• Compares results across publication years to assess stability and sensitivity of the metrics.
• Applies normalization techniques to RDF to allow cross-year and cross-journal comparisons despite varying citation volumes.

Experimental results

Research questions

• RQ1 How do synchronous and diachronous versions of JDF and RDF differ in measuring journal influence over time?
• RQ2 To what extent does the number of citing journals affect the value of the diachronous JDF?
• RQ3 Why do highly cited publication years show lower RDF values, and what does this imply about the metric's sensitivity?
• RQ4 Can impact and diffusion factors serve as reliable longitudinal indicators of journal development?
• RQ5 How do publication volume and citation distribution influence the reliability of diffusion-based metrics?

Key findings

• The diachronous JDF for MJM ranged from 0.46 to 1.98, significantly higher than the synchronous JDF (0.057–0.14), indicating broader long-term citation reach.
• The high diachronous JDF is attributed to a relatively high number of distinct citing journals relative to the number of publications.
• Synchronous RDF values varied between 0.66 and 1.00, while diachronous RDF ranged from 0.62 to 0.88, showing moderate but stable diffusion.
• Diachronous RDF showed a negative correlation with citation counts, resulting in lower values for highly cited publication years.
• The results suggest that diffusion factors can be computed for every additional year, enabling dynamic tracking of journal influence over time.
• The study confirms that impact and diffusion factors are valuable tools for monitoring the evolving influence of journals across time.