Is Interactive Open Access Publishing Able to Identify High-Impact Submissions? 
A Study on the Predictive Validity of Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics by 
Using Percentile Rank Classes

Bornmann, L.; Schier, H.; Marx, W.; Daniel, H. D.

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Add to Basket

Local TagsRelease HistoryDetailsSummary

Released

Journal Article

Is Interactive Open Access Publishing Able to Identify High-Impact Submissions? A Study on the Predictive Validity of Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics by Using Percentile Rank Classes

MPS-Authors

/persons/resource/persons280284

Marx, W.
Scientific Facility Information Service CPT (Robin Haunschild/Thomas Scheidsteger), Max Planck Institute for Solid State Research, Max Planck Society;

External Resource

No external resources are shared

Fulltext (restricted access)

There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.

Fulltext (public)

There are no public fulltexts stored in PuRe

Supplementary Material (public)

There is no public supplementary material available

Citation

Bornmann, L., Schier, H., Marx, W., & Daniel, H. D. (2011). Is Interactive Open Access Publishing Able to Identify High-Impact Submissions? A Study on the Predictive Validity of Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics by Using Percentile Rank Classes. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(1), 61-71.

Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-000E-C07D-D

Abstract

In a comprehensive research project, we investigated the predictive validity of selection decisions and reviewers' ratings at the open access journal Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP). ACP is a high-impact journal publishing papers on the Earth's atmosphere and the underlying chemical and physical processes. Scientific journals have to deal with the following question concerning the predictive validity: Are in fact the "best" scientific works selected from the manuscripts submitted? In this study we examined whether selecting the "best" manuscripts means selecting papers that after publication show top citation performance as compared to other papers in this research area. First, we appraised the citation impact of later published manuscripts based on the percentile citedness rank classes of the population distribution (scaling in a specific subfield). Second, we analyzed the association between the decisions (n = 677 accepted or rejected, but published elsewhere manuscripts) or ratings (reviewers' ratings for n = 315 manuscripts), respectively, and the citation impact classes of the manuscripts. The results confirm the predictive validity of the ACP peer review system.