Tag: journal impact factor

First Journal Impact Factor for European Science Editing

The open-access European Science Editing journal received its first Impact Factor and ranked in Q2 in Library and Information Science in the Web of Science Core Collection (ESCI).

European Science Editing, the official journal of the European Association of Science Editors (EASE), has received its first Journal Impact Factor (JIF) from Clarivate’s Web of Science. Its 2025 JIF stands at 1.6, a key milestone for the journal and a recognition of its growing influence in the scholarly communication community.

Further, the journal ranks in Q2 in Library and Information Science in the Web of Science Core Collection (ESCI).

Prior to this JIF, European Science Editing had already demonstrated strong and growing recognition in Scopus, with its 2025 CiteScore reaching 3.0, up from 2.3 in 2024, ranking in Q2 for Communication and Q3 for Health Informatics.

A key metric released by Clarivate, the 2025 Journal Impact Factor reflects the number of times content published in a specific journal during 2023 and 2024 was cited in 2025. This total citation count is then divided by the number of citable articles (i.e., research and review articles) to estimate the JIF.

European Science Editing journal homepage
Journal homepage.

The journal’s history can be traced back to 1986 when it was published as a bulletin. Then, in 2003 European Science Editing was launched as a peer-reviewed journal published four times a year, dedicated to supporting research within the scope of the Association. In January 2020, the journal converted to Diamond Open Access with a rolling publication model on the ARPHA Platform, giving authors greater presence and impact across the membership and the wider scholarly publishing community.

The journal is powered by the ARPHA Platform, a one-stop publishing solution developed by Pensoft that offers a seamless, end-to-end publishing experience encompassing all stages from manuscript submission through to publication, indexation, dissemination, and permanent archiving.

ARPHA’s robust support for academic publishing also includes a variety of human-provided services and integrations with third-party providers, intended to maximise the reach and usability of scholarly knowledge published in European Science Editing.

On this success, the Editor-in-Chief, Ksenija Bazdaric of Rijeka University, reflects:

As Editor-in-Chief of the European Science Editing journal, I am delighted by this result. With the support of ARPHA, we have received our very first impact factor of 1.6. Our Diamond Open Access journal is celebrating this big milestone and its editors and advisory board will work further on raising the journal quality by producing relevant and interesting content for our readership.

Follow EASE on LinkedIn, Bluesky, Facebook and Instagram. You can also follow ARPHA on Bluesky and LinkedIn.

Determinants of citation impact

Put together, formal parameters other than journal impact – such as the brevity of an article’s title – turned out to be stronger citation predictors.

Guest blog post by Jürgen Dengler

“What makes a paper successful?” is something authors would like to know when submitting a manuscript and editors when deciding on the acceptance of papers. 

One answer is: “Write an exciting paper on a relevant topic with up-to-date methods”. 

While this is certainly true, most authors feel that this is not the whole truth. The enormous efforts some authors invest in getting their paper accepted in a “high-rank” journal reflect the belief that the publication venue influences the scientific impact of a paper. Other authors spend quite some time in finding a “fancy” title for their contribution.

But do such “formal” aspects actually influence the impact of articles and, if so, to which degree and which are the most relevant ones? 

Astonishingly, there is very little published evidence on these aspects. 

Thus, I conducted an empirical study using my own publication output over the years. With almost 200 papers in over 50 indexed journals, it already allows some generalisations. With the three IAVS journals, Journal of Vegetation Science, Applied Vegetation Science and Vegetation Classification and Survey, being among the preferred outlets, the journal portfolio is probably also quite similar to that of other IAVS members. 

As a common currency for citation impact, I used the Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI), provided by the Scopus database. While the absolute number of citations is not suitable for a meaningful comparison between papers as the number of citations always increases with time since publication, FWCI standardised citations compared to all articles published in the same year in the same subject field and as the same article type (e.g. research article vs. review article). 

A FWCI of 1 means that an article is cited as much as the average, a FWCI of 2 refers to twice as many citations as an average article, etc. Scopus also provides a corresponding measure to FWCI at the journal level, namely the Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP), which essentially is the mean of the FWCI values of all papers in that journal in the respective period.

According to the multiple regression analysis, journal impact (SNIP) was the strongest predictor of the article impact. 

However, alone it explained only 26.8% of the variance while other formal parameters together explained 31.5% of the variance. 

Among those, the brevity of the title was most influential. Each word less in the title led to 9% more citations. 

Further, both article length and author number had a positive influence on citations.

Publishing in a special feature increased the citation rate by 43%. 

By contrast, open access or formulating titles as questions or factual statements did not significantly influence citation rates.

In conclusion, selecting a high-impact journal has less influence on the article impact than many people believe – the citation impact of different articles in one journal typically varies more than the mean citation impact between different journals.

For authors, the easiest way to increase the impact of a given article is to shorten the title as much as possible. 

Caption: Variation of the Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) values of articles in journals represented by at least five articles in the analysed sample, with box height proportional to the number of included papers. All three IAVS journals were well represented. The variation of citation impact within individual journals was very large (note the log-scale of the x-axis). For example, the best cited articles of the author in JVS, AVS and VCS all had a considerably better citation performance than the single Nature paper co-authored by the author (FWCI = 3.70).

Associated journal article:

Dengler J (2024) Determinants of citation impact. Vegetation Classification and Survey 5: 169-177. https://doi.org/10.3897/VCS.126956.

***

Originally published on the Vegetation Science Blog: Official blog post of the IAVS journals.

***

You can follow the Vegetation Classification and Survey (VCS) journal on X (formerly Twitter) and Facebook.