Pat Hannah, Journal Manager, CSIRO Publishing. Email: pat.hannah@csiro.au
In the ever-evolving landscape of academic publishing, the importance of tracking metrics for our journals is important in evaluating the overall health of a journal. As a journal manager, I am often asked about the various metrics we track and how they contribute to the success and credibility of our journals. The following few paragraphs aim to explain the key metrics we monitor, and how they collectively shape the influence and reputation of our academic journals.
Downloads, CrossRef Clickthroughs, and PageViews
One of the primary usage metrics we track is the number of downloads for our journal articles. Downloads provide a direct measure of the interest and engagement our content generates. High download numbers indicate that our articles are being accessed and potentially utilized in further research, teaching, and practical applications.
Rangeland Journal content has been downloaded between 7-13k times per month in 2024, an increase from 4-8k times per month in 2023. The Rangeland Journal’s content from the last 5 years is viewed more often than older content, demonstrating that not only is the journals content becoming more accessible as we develop our open access offerings, indexing opportunities and marketing strategy, but our content is also being engaged with more often. It is important to note that previous years download numbers may not reflect the true viewership of the journal during periods of time in which we provided printed versions of the Journal.
Equally important are CrossRef clickthroughs, which track the number of times our articles are being referenced and accessed from other platforms, via Digital Object Identifier (DOI) interactions. This metric not only reflects the visibility of our content but also its relevance and integration into the broader academic dialogue.
We see the Rangeland Journal performing well in CrossRef resolutions, similar to the boost in download numbers we have seen in the last 2-3 years. Of significant note, is a paper “Can changes to pasture management reduce runoff and sediment loss to the Great Barrier Reef? The results of a 10-year study in the Burdekin catchment, Australia” (https://doi.org/10.1071/RJ13013) by Rebecca Bartley et al. (2014), which was the most clicked on article in June 2024 in the entire CSIRO Publishing Portfolio, according to CrossRef data.
Google Analytics data into website visits (CSIRO PUBLISHING | The Rangeland Journal) also demonstrates a steady increase in usage, indicating the total number of pages viewed, including repeated views of a single page by the same visitor. Unlike the COUNTER downloads, data from Google Analytics include all visits to HTML pages of the site and are not restricted to paying subscribers or customers. This tool thus provides us with another view of the journal’s audience. Google Analytics tracks traffic to HTML pages only; users accessing PDFs directly, without bypassing an HTML page, are not counted. Interestingly for The Rangeland Journal, 50% of our audience comes from Australia, with the next largest supply of page visits coming from China (10%) and the USA (8%).
Together, the download, CrossRef and Google Analytic data provide a generous picture of journal usage and allows us to observe the journal’s audience with a broad scope; how are readers finding us and where are our readers coming from.
Citations and Impact Factor
Citations are perhaps the most well-known metric in academic publishing. They serve as a testament to the influence of our research. When other researchers cite our articles, it may indicate that our work has contributed valuable knowledge to the field. We know that impact factor is not the single most important metric when we consider the success of a journal, but it is hard to escape the fact that it is a relevant metric for many authors when they are considering publishing in a journal.
Even though Journal Impact Factors are a prominent way of assessing the quality of a journal, they are considered to be an imperfect measure of the relative importance of a journal within its field. Impact factors are based on the average number of citations per paper (during the two preceding years), and citation distributions within journals are so often highly skewed (i.e., it’s often one or two papers that cite well that influences the impact factor calculation). Impact factors may not reflect the true quality of a journal, as citations may include criticisms of the work published within that journal.
In saying this, The Rangeland Journal’s impact factor in 2023 held steady when compared to previous years at 1.2. In 2023, a number of journals saw decreases in their impact factors as we moved out of the COVID publishing bubble. Following this plateau in the journal’s impact factor we look to improve the journal’s visibility in the coming 2024 calendar year to improve the journal’s output and impact going forward while maintaining our strong editorial processes that CSIRO Publishing prides itself on.
It is important to note that CSIRO Publishing and The Rangeland Journal take great pride in maintaining a strong editorial team that evaluates scientific literature based on academic merit. We uphold rigorous editorial standards without compromising for increased publication numbers, ensuring the consistent and robust assessment of submitted work. Additionally, we recognize the importance of an efficient editorial process that serves the interests of our authors, providing timely responses to avoid delaying their research outputs. I am pleased to report that both our pre-acceptance (AVERAGE: 37 days in 2022 to 31 days in 2023) and post-acceptance (AVERAGE: 36 days in 2022 to 27 days in 2023) workflows have significantly improved in recent years, resulting in more prompt decisions for our authors.
Altmetric Data
In today’s digital age, traditional metrics like citations and downloads are complemented by altmetric data, which provide a broader view of how our research is being discussed and disseminated. Altmetric data capture mentions of content across various media, including news outlets, blogs, policy documents, and social media platforms.
These data highlight the societal impact and public engagement with our research. For instance, a study that garners significant attention on social media or is cited in a policy document can have far-reaching implications beyond academia.
The Rangeland Journal has had significant recent success in these metrics, in particular with the following papers;
“An uncertain future: climate resilience of first-generation ranchers” by Kate Munden-Dixon et al. (2018 – https://doi.org/10.1071/RJ18023) is our highest altmetrics-scoring article gaining significant attention in the news (mentioned in 21 articles) and social media (30 posts). This resulted in increased readership for the paper, and increased citations, showing that this promotion helped not just communicate the science to the public, but also aided in getting the research in front of the authors’ peers.
We find that this tends to be a consistent theme through papers that are mentioned in both news articles and social media, that it generally results in an increased level of citations for the paper. Generally, high citations do not mean a high number of mentions, but a high number of mentions will generally result in increased citations.
Other papers that have seen significant success include:
- “The diet of the dingo (Canis lupus dingo) in north-eastern Australia with comments on its conservation implications” Brooke and Kutt 2011 < https://doi.org/10.1071/RJ10052> (21 news article and 3 social media posts – 31 citations).
- “Prolific or precarious: a review of the status of Australian sandalwood (Santalum spicatum [R.Br.] A.DC., Santalaceae)” McLellan, Dixon and Watson (2021) <https://doi.org/10.1071/RJ21017> (8 news articles and 82 social media posts – 6 citations).
- “Can dingoes increase graziers’ profits and help maintain Australia’s rangelands?” Campbell, Emmott, Pollock and Traill (2022) <https://doi.org/10.1071/RJ22002> (10 news articles and 41 social media posts – 2 citations).
Integrating Metrics for a Holistic View
While each metric mentioned above offers unique insights, their true value lies in their integration. By analysing these metrics collectively, we gain a comprehensive understanding of our journals’ performance and impact. Journal metrics are shared as a way of quantifying the impact this journal has on the research community. However, they should always be considered in the context of how they are calculated, and we emphasise that none of these journal-level metrics should be used to judge the impact of an individual article or author, or their research outputs.
We believe that maintaining high standards of publishing, and the scientific quality of an individual paper and its contribution to advancing knowledge in a field, are the most important aspects to consider when assessing the quality of a journal. Attaining respectable metrics should be viewed as an outcome of striving for quality in our publishing program.