UPDATE 12/2/07 7:24 a.m.: I’ve done a couple of minor corrections again on the h- and g-values, and won’t update them again, so anyone wishing to use these numbers can reference them as having been generated by me using Harzing’s Publish or Perish program (available here for free) on December 2, 2007.
UPDATE 12/1/07 5:30 p.m.: Some of the Hirsch and Egghe numbers were incorrect (see comments 14 and 15 below for the nature of the errors–thanks to Daniel Nolan for noticing the problem), and I’ve now corrected the errors.
I’ve been gathering some data on journals in philosophy and thought it would be useful to many to post a link to it here. The information contained is, first, the ranking of the journal by the ESF. The second and third columns on the spreadsheet give two different metrics that try to measure the scholarly impact of a journal. The first column is the Hirsch number and the second is the Egghe number. I’ll include explanations of these measures below the fold. The last column is the information I’ve gathered from various sources about rejection rates at journals. I’m hoping some readers can fill in some of the gaps that remain, so if you know the rejection rate of a journal that I don’t give, please put it in the comments and I’ll update the spreadsheet. I should note that I’m a bit skeptical of the rejection rate data. The rates are self-reported and in most cases are mere estimates (how else to explain the amazing coincidence of so many with 90% rejection rates?), with no standardization about what counts as a rejection (for example, if your paper is sent back to you as a revise-and-resubmit, does that count as a rejection?). Moreover, there is significant motivation to report as high a rejection rate as possible, since that suggests high standards. In any case, here’s the data that I’ve got.
The journal list contains all the major journals, but is not complete, and is skewed by special issues I’m addressing at my home institution. Let me know of any obvious omissions.
Here’s the explanation of the h-value and g-value column. I generated these numbers for the period 1997-2007 of a number of journals in philosophy, selecting mostly from journals listed in the departmental tenure guidelines of the Philosophy Department at Baylor, using Google Scholar. Hirsch’s h-index was proposed by J.E. Hirsch in his paper “An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output,” arXiv:physics/0508025 v5 29 Sep 2005. The intention behind it is to provide a single-number metric of scholarly impact. Egghe’s g-index was proposed by Leo Egghe in his paper “Theory and practice of the g-index,” Scientometrics, Vol. 69, No 1 (2006), pp. 131-152. It aims to improve on the h-index by giving more weight to highly-cited articles. The definitions of these indices are as follows:
h-index: if your h-index is n, n is the greatest number such that you have at least n papers with n or more citations each.
g-index: if your g-index is n, then n is the greatest number such that your first n papers have at least n-squared citations when taken together.
The h-index is thus a combined measure of number of articles and citations per article published. The g-index is designed to give greater weight to disproportionately highly cited articles, since the h-index isn’t sensitive at all to the difference between a record whose top-cited article was cited 50,000 times versus one that was cited 5,000 times.
Once can study not only individual citation impact but also journal impact using these indices. That’s what the h-value and g-value columns do. So, for example, Journal of Philosophy, for the decade in question, has 24 articles with at least 24 citations each. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, by contrast, has only 2 articles with at least 2 citations each for the time period in question. That’s a pretty good reason to think of JP as making the discipline in a way that IJPR does not.
Any help with additional data would be appreciated.