Nature Nanotechnology
Hệ số ảnh hưởng - Phân tích · Khuynh hướng · Xếp hạng · Sự dự đoán


Mới

Hệ số ảnh hưởng

2019-2020

31.538

-5.6 %

Hệ số ảnh hưởng Trend

Related Journals

Popular Journals

Nature Nanotechnology

The 2019-2020 Hệ số ảnh hưởng of Nature Nanotechnology is 31.538, which is just updated in 2020.

Nature Nanotechnology Impact Factor
Highest IF
38.986
Highest Hệ số ảnh hưởng

The highest Hệ số ảnh hưởng of Nature Nanotechnology is 38.986.

Lowest IF
27.27
Lowest Hệ số ảnh hưởng

The lowest Hệ số ảnh hưởng of Nature Nanotechnology is 27.27.

Total Growth Rate
15.7%
IF Total Growth Rate

The total growth rate of Nature Nanotechnology IF is 15.7%.

Annual Growth Rate
1.7%
IF Annual Growth Rate

The annual growth rate of Nature Nanotechnology IF is 1.7%.

Hệ số ảnh hưởng Ranking

Subcategory Quartile Rank Percentile
General Materials Science Q1 2/460

General Materials Science 99%

Electrical and Electronic Engineering Q1 1/670

Electrical and Electronic Engineering 99%

Condensed Matter Physics Q1 2/403

Condensed Matter Physics 99%

Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics Q1 1/183

Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics 99%

Biomedical Engineering Q1 1/225

Biomedical Engineering 99%

Bioengineering Q1 1/148

Bioengineering 99%

Hệ số ảnh hưởng Ranking

· In the General Materials Science research field, the Quartile of Nature Nanotechnology is Q1. Nature Nanotechnology has been ranked #2 over 460 related journals in the General Materials Science research category. The ranking percentile of Nature Nanotechnology is around 99% in the field of General Materials Science.
· In the Electrical and Electronic Engineering research field, the Quartile of Nature Nanotechnology is Q1. Nature Nanotechnology has been ranked #1 over 670 related journals in the Electrical and Electronic Engineering research category. The ranking percentile of Nature Nanotechnology is around 99% in the field of Electrical and Electronic Engineering.
· In the Condensed Matter Physics research field, the Quartile of Nature Nanotechnology is Q1. Nature Nanotechnology has been ranked #2 over 403 related journals in the Condensed Matter Physics research category. The ranking percentile of Nature Nanotechnology is around 99% in the field of Condensed Matter Physics.
· In the Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics research field, the Quartile of Nature Nanotechnology is Q1. Nature Nanotechnology has been ranked #1 over 183 related journals in the Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics research category. The ranking percentile of Nature Nanotechnology is around 99% in the field of Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics.
· In the Biomedical Engineering research field, the Quartile of Nature Nanotechnology is Q1. Nature Nanotechnology has been ranked #1 over 225 related journals in the Biomedical Engineering research category. The ranking percentile of Nature Nanotechnology is around 99% in the field of Biomedical Engineering.
· In the Bioengineering research field, the Quartile of Nature Nanotechnology is Q1. Nature Nanotechnology has been ranked #1 over 148 related journals in the Bioengineering research category. The ranking percentile of Nature Nanotechnology is around 99% in the field of Bioengineering.

Nature Nanotechnology Impact Factor 2020-2021 Prediction

Nature Nanotechnology Impact Factor Predition System

Nature Nanotechnology Impact Factor Prediction System is now online. You can start share your valuable insights with the community.

Predict Check All Preditions
Total Publications
4039
Total Citations
647032

Annual Publication Volume

Annual Citation Record

International Collaboration Trend

Cited Documents Trend

Hệ số ảnh hưởng History

Year Hệ số ảnh hưởng
Year Hệ số ảnh hưởng
2019-2020 31.538
2018-2019 33.407
2017-2018 37.49
2016-2017 38.986
2015-2016 35.267
2014-2015 34.048
2013-2014 33.265
2012-2013 31.17
2011-2012 27.27
Hệ số ảnh hưởng History

· The 2019-2020 Hệ số ảnh hưởng of Nature Nanotechnology is 31.538
· The 2018-2019 Hệ số ảnh hưởng of Nature Nanotechnology is 33.407
· The 2017-2018 Hệ số ảnh hưởng of Nature Nanotechnology is 37.49
· The 2016-2017 Hệ số ảnh hưởng of Nature Nanotechnology is 38.986
· The 2015-2016 Hệ số ảnh hưởng of Nature Nanotechnology is 35.267
· The 2014-2015 Hệ số ảnh hưởng of Nature Nanotechnology is 34.048
· The 2013-2014 Hệ số ảnh hưởng of Nature Nanotechnology is 33.265
· The 2012-2013 Hệ số ảnh hưởng of Nature Nanotechnology is 31.17
· The 2011-2012 Hệ số ảnh hưởng of Nature Nanotechnology is 27.27

Publications Cites Dataset

Year Publications Citations
Year Publications Citations
2005 0 15
2006 164 109
2007 405 1080
2008 342 4000
2009 371 8606
2010 209 14934
2011 189 25127
2012 199 34264
2013 274 44144
2014 293 52102
2015 276 63636
2016 278 70890
2017 290 80612
2018 274 72723
2019 245 77551
2020 209 88571
2021 21 8668
Publications Cites Dataset

· The Nature Nanotechnology has published 0 reports and received 15 citations in 2005.
· The Nature Nanotechnology has published 164 reports and received 109 citations in 2006.
· The Nature Nanotechnology has published 405 reports and received 1080 citations in 2007.
· The Nature Nanotechnology has published 342 reports and received 4000 citations in 2008.
· The Nature Nanotechnology has published 371 reports and received 8606 citations in 2009.
· The Nature Nanotechnology has published 209 reports and received 14934 citations in 2010.
· The Nature Nanotechnology has published 189 reports and received 25127 citations in 2011.
· The Nature Nanotechnology has published 199 reports and received 34264 citations in 2012.
· The Nature Nanotechnology has published 274 reports and received 44144 citations in 2013.
· The Nature Nanotechnology has published 293 reports and received 52102 citations in 2014.
· The Nature Nanotechnology has published 276 reports and received 63636 citations in 2015.
· The Nature Nanotechnology has published 278 reports and received 70890 citations in 2016.
· The Nature Nanotechnology has published 290 reports and received 80612 citations in 2017.
· The Nature Nanotechnology has published 274 reports and received 72723 citations in 2018.
· The Nature Nanotechnology has published 245 reports and received 77551 citations in 2019.
· The Nature Nanotechnology has published 209 reports and received 88571 citations in 2020.
· The Nature Nanotechnology has published 21 reports and received 8668 citations in 2021.
· The total publications of Nature Nanotechnology is 4039.
· The total citations of Nature Nanotechnology is 647032.

Nature Nanotechnology
Journal Profile
Nature Nanotechnology | Academic Accelerator - About the Journal

About

Nature Nanotechnology is an interdisciplinary journal that publishes papers of the highest quality and significance in all areas of nanoscience and nanotechnology. The journal covers research into the design, characterization and production of structures, devices and systems that involve the manipulation and control of materials and phenomena at atomic, molecular and macromolecular scales. Both bottom-up and top-down approaches — and combinations of the two — are covered.Nature Nanotechnology also encourages the exchange of ideas between chemists, physicists, material scientists, biomedical researchers, engineers and other researchers who are active at the frontiers of this diverse and multidisciplinary field. Coverage extends from basic research in physics, chemistry and biology, including computational work and simulations, through to the development of new devices and technologies for applications in a wide range of industrial sectors (including information technology, medicine, manufacturing, high-performance materials, and energy and environmental technologies). Organic, inorganic and hybrid materials are all covered.Research areas covered in the journal:-Carbon nanotubes and fullerenes-Computational nanotechnology-Electronic properties and devices-Environmental, health and safety issues-Molecular machines and motors-Molecular self-assembly-Nanobiotechnology-Nanofluidics-Nanomagnetism and spintronics-Nanomaterials-Nanomedicine-Nanometrology and instrumentation-Nanoparticles-Nanosensors and other devices-NEMS-Organic–inorganic nanostructures-Photonic structures and devices-Quantum information-Structural properties-Surface patterning and imaging-Synthesis and processing Nature Nanotechnology is a monthly peer-reviewed scientific journal published by Nature Publishing Group. It was established in October 2006. The editor-in-chief is Fabio Pulizzi. It covers all aspects of nanoscience and nanotechnology.

ISSN
1748-3387
ISSN

The ISSN of Nature Nanotechnology is 1748-3387 . An ISSN is an 8-digit code used to identify newspapers, journals, magazines and periodicals of all kinds and on all media–print and electronic.

ISSN (Online)
1748-3395
ISSN (Online)

The ISSN (Online) of Nature Nanotechnology is 1748-3395 . An ISSN is an 8-digit code used to identify newspapers, journals, magazines and periodicals of all kinds and on all media–print and electronic.

Publisher
Nature Publishing Group
Publisher

Nature Nanotechnology is published by Nature Publishing Group .

Publication Frequency
Monthly
Publication Frequency

Nature Nanotechnology publishes reports Monthly .

Coverage
2006 - Present
Coverage

The Publication History of Nature Nanotechnology covers 2006 - Present .

Open Access
NO
Open Access

Nature Nanotechnology is Subscription-based (non-OA) Journal. Publishers own the rights to the articles in their journals. Anyone who wants to read the articles should pay by individual or institution to access the articles. Anyone who wants to use the articles in any way must obtain permission from the publishers.

Publication Fee
Review
Publication Fee

There is no publication fee for submiting manuscript to Nature Nanotechnology. Nature Nanotechnology is Subscription-based (non-OA) Journal. Publishers own the rights to the articles in their journals. Anyone who wants to read the articles should pay by individual or institution to access the articles.

Language
English
Language

The language of Nature Nanotechnology is English .

Country/Region
United Kingdom
Country/Region

The publisher of Nature Nanotechnology is Nature Publishing Group , which locates in United Kingdom .

What is Impact Factor?

The impact factor (IF) or journal impact factor (JIF) of an academic journal is a scientometric index calculated by Clarivate that reflects the yearly average number of citations of articles published in the last two years in a given journal. It is frequently used as a proxy for the relative importance of a journal within its field; journals with higher impact factor values are often deemed to be more important, or carry more intrinsic prestige in their respective fields, than those with lower values.

Nature Nanotechnology | Academic Accelerator - About the Impact Factor

Impact factor is commonly used to evaluate the relative importance of a journal within its field and to measure the frequency with which the “average article” in a journal has been cited in a particular time period. Journal which publishes more review articles will get highest IFs. Journals with higher IFs believed to be more important than those with lower ones. According to Eugene Garfield “impact simply reflects the ability of the journals and editors to attract the best paper available.” Journal which publishes more review articles will get maximum IFs. The Impact Factor of an academic journal is a scientometric Metric that reflects the yearly average number of citations that recent articles published in a given journal received. It is frequently used as a Metric for the relative importance of a journal within its field; journals with higher Impact Factor are often deemed to be more important than those with lower ones. The Nature Nanotechnology Impact Factor IF measures the average number of citations received in a particular year (2020) by papers published in the Nature Nanotechnology during the two preceding years (2018-2019). Note that 2020 Impact Factor are reported in 2021; they cannot be calculated until all of the 2020 publications have been processed by the indexing agency. New journals, which are indexed from their first published issue, will receive an impact factor after two years of indexing; in this case, the citations to the year prior to Volume 1, and the number of articles published in the year prior to Volume 1, are known zero values. Journals that are indexed starting with a volume other than the first volume will not get an impact factor until they have been indexed for three years. Occasionally, Journal Citation Reports assigns an impact factor to new journals with less than two years of indexing, based on partial citation data. The calculation always uses two complete and known years of item counts, but for new titles one of the known counts is zero. Annuals and other irregular publications sometimes publish no items in a particular year, affecting the count. The impact factor relates to a specific time period; it is possible to calculate it for any desired period. In addition to the 2-year Impact Factor, the 3-year Impact Factor, 4-year Impact Factor, 5-year Impact Factor, Real-Time Impact Factor can provide further insights and factors into the impact of Nature Nanotechnology.

History

The impact factor was devised by Eugene Garfield, the founder of the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI). Impact factors are calculated yearly starting from 1975 for journals listed in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR). ISI was acquired by Thomson Scientific & Healthcare in 1992, and became known as Thomson ISI. In 2018, Thomson ISI was sold to Onex Corporation and Baring Private Equity Asia. They founded a new corporation, Clarivate, which is now the publisher of the JCR.

Use

The impact factor is used to compare different journals within a certain field. The Web of Science indexes more than 11,500 science and social science journals. Journal impact factors are often used to evaluate the merit of individual articles and individual researchers. This use of impact factors was summarised by Hoeffel:

Impact Factor is not a perfect tool to measure the quality of articles but there is nothing better and it has the advantage of already being in existence and is, therefore, a good technique for scientific evaluation. Experience has shown that in each specialty the best journals are those in which it is most difficult to have an article accepted, and these are the journals that have a high impact factor. Most of these journals existed long before the impact factor was devised. The use of impact factor as a measure of quality is widespread because it fits well with the opinion we have in each field of the best journals in our specialty....In conclusion, prestigious journals publish papers of high level. Therefore, their impact factor is high, and not the contrary.

Eugene Garfield

In brief, Impact factors may be used by:
  • Authors to decide where to submit an article for publication.
  • Libraries to make collection development decisions
  • Academic departments to assess academic productivity
  • Academic departments to make decisions on promotion and tenure.
As impact factors are a journal-level metric, rather than an article- or individual-level metric, this use is controversial. Garfield agrees with Hoeffel,but warns about the "misuse in evaluating individuals" because there is "a wide variation [of citations] from article to article within a single journal". Other things to consider about Impact Factors:
  • Many journals do not have an impact factor.
  • The impact factor cannot assess the quality of individual articles. Even if citations were evenly distributed among articles, the impact factor would only measure the interests of other researchers in an article, not its importance and usefulness.
  • Only research articles, technical notes and reviews are “citable” items. Editorials, letters, news items and meeting abstracts are “non-citable items”.
  • Only a small percentage of articles are highly cited and they are found in a small subset of journals. This small proportion accounts for a large percentage of citations.
  • Controversial papers, such as those based on fraudulent data, may be highly cited, distorting the impact factor of a journal.
  • Citation bias may exist. For example, English language resources may be favoured. Authors may cite their own work.
Moreover, informed and careful use of these impact data is essential, and should be based on a thorough understanding of the methodology used to generate impact factors. There are controversial aspects of using impact factors:
  • It is not clear whether the number of times a paper is cited measures its actual quality.
  • Some databases that calculate impact factors fail to incorporate publications including textbooks, handbooks and reference books.
  • Certain disciplines have low numbers of journals and usage. Therefore, one should only compare journals or researchers within the same discipline.
  • Review articles normally are cited more often and therefore can skew results.
  • Self-citing may also skew results.
  • Some resources used to calculate impact factors have inadequate international coverage.
  • Editorial policies can artificially inflate an impact factor.
Impact factors have often been used in advancement and tenure decision-making. Many recognize that this is a coarse tool for such important decisions, and that a multitude of factors should be taken into account in these deliberations. When considering the use of the impact factor (IF), keep these aspects in mind:
  • IF analysis is limited to citations from the journals indexed by the Web of Science/Web of Knowledge. Currently, the Web of Science indexes only 8621 journals across the full breadth of the sciences, and just 3121 in the social sciences.
  • A high IF/citation rate says nothing about the quality -- or even, validity -- of the references being cited. Notorious or even retracted articles often attract a lot of attention, hence a high number of citations. The notority related to the first publication on "cold fusion" is one such example.
  • Journals that publish more "review articles" are often found near the top of the rankings. While not known for publishing new, creative findings, these individual articles tend to be heavily cited.
  • The IF measures the average number of citations to articles in the journal -- given this, a small number of highly-cited articles will skew the figure.
  • It takes several years for new journals to be added to the list of titles indexed by the Web of Science/Web of Knowledge, so these newer titles will be under-represented.
  • It's alleged that journal editors have learned to "game" the system, encouraging authors to cite their works previously published in the same journal.
Comparing Journals Across Disciplines? Not a good idea! Using Impact Factors within a given discipline should only be done with great care, as described above. Using impact factor data to compare journals across disciplines is even more problematic. Here are some of the reasons:
  • Disciplines where older literature is still referenced, such as Chemistry and Mathematics, offer challenges to the methodolgy since older citations (older than two years) are not used to calculate the impact factor for a given journal. (Five-year impact factor analysis, which can be calculated using the Journal Citation Index database, helps smooth out this problem only to some degree.)
  • Different disciplines have different practices regarding tendency to cite larger numbers of references. Higher overall citation rates will bump upward impact factor measurements.
  • Where it's common for large numbers of authors to collaborate on a single paper, such as in Physics, the tendency of authors to cite themselves (and in this case, more authors) will result in increased citation rates.

Pros and Cons of the Impact Factor

Pros:

  • A vetted, established metric for measuring journal impact within a discipline.
  • Designed to eliminate bias based on journal size and frequency.
Cons:
  • Individual articles makes an uneven contribution to overall Impact Factor.
  • Impact Factor does not account for certain things, things like context (postive or negative citaion) and intentionality (self-citation).
  • The metric is proprietary to and bound by the contents of the Thomson Reuters database.
  • Citations, on which the Impact Factor is based, count for less than 1% of an article's overall use.

Criticism

Numerous critiques have been made regarding the use of impact factors. A 2007 study noted that the most fundamental flaw is that impact factors present the mean of data that are not normally distributed, and suggested that it would be more appropriate to present the median of these data. There is also a more general debate on the validity of the impact factor as a measure of journal importance and the effect of policies that editors may adopt to boost their impact factor (perhaps to the detriment of readers and writers). Other criticism focuses on the effect of the impact factor on behavior of scholars, editors and other stakeholders. Others have made more general criticisms, arguing that emphasis on impact factor results from negative influence of neoliberal policies on academia claiming that what is needed is not just replacement of the impact factor with more sophisticated metrics for science publications but also discussion on the social value of research assessment and the growing precariousness of scientific careers in higher education.
Experts stress that there are limitations in using impact factors to evaluate a scholar's work. There are many reasons cited for not relying on impact factor alone to evaluate the output of a particular individual. Among these are the following:

  • A single factor is not sufficient for evaluating an author's work.
  • Journal values are meaningless unless compared within the same discipline. Impact factors vary among disciplines.
  • The impact factor was originally devised to show the impact of a specific journal, not a specific scholar. The quality and impact of the author's work may extend beyond the impact of a particular journal.
According to Jim Testa, a researcher for ThomsonReuters Scientific, the most widespread misuse of the Impact Factor is to evaluate the work of an individual author (instead of a journal). "To say that because a researcher is publishing in a certain journal, he or she is more influential or deserves more credit is not necessarily true. There are many other variables to consider." (interview 6/26/2008 in Thomson Reuters blog entry)