Developmental Review
最新影响因子 - 实时趋势预测 & 排名分区分析


最新

影响因子

2019-2020

3.727

-23.1 %

影响因子趋势分析

相关期刊

Developmental Review

Developmental Review 2019-2020 年的影响因子为3.727。

Developmental Review Impact Factor
最高影响因子
4.846
最高影响因子 IF

近十年Developmental Review的最高影响因子为4.846。

最低影响因子
3.226
最低影响因子 IF

近十年Developmental Review的最低影响因子为3.226。

影响因子 总成长率
15.5%
影响因子 总成长率

近十年Developmental Review的影响因子总成长率为15.5%。

影响因子 平均成长率
1.7%
影响因子 平均成长率

近十年Developmental Review的影响因子平均成长率为1.7%。

影响因子排名分区

子领域 分区 排名 百分比
Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health 1区 6/286

Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health 98%

Developmental and Educational Psychology 1区 10/327

Developmental and Educational Psychology 97%

Experimental and Cognitive Psychology 1区 4/145

Experimental and Cognitive Psychology 97%

Education 1区 15/1254

Education 98%

Psychiatry and Mental Health 1区 32/506

Psychiatry and Mental Health 93%

影响因子排名分区

· 在Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health研究领域,Developmental Review的分区数为1区。Developmental Review在Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health研究类别的286种相关期刊中排名第6。在Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health领域,Developmental Review的排名百分位约为98%。
· 在Developmental and Educational Psychology研究领域,Developmental Review的分区数为1区。Developmental Review在Developmental and Educational Psychology研究类别的327种相关期刊中排名第10。在Developmental and Educational Psychology领域,Developmental Review的排名百分位约为97%。
· 在Experimental and Cognitive Psychology研究领域,Developmental Review的分区数为1区。Developmental Review在Experimental and Cognitive Psychology研究类别的145种相关期刊中排名第4。在Experimental and Cognitive Psychology领域,Developmental Review的排名百分位约为97%。
· 在Education研究领域,Developmental Review的分区数为1区。Developmental Review在Education研究类别的1254种相关期刊中排名第15。在Education领域,Developmental Review的排名百分位约为98%。
· 在Psychiatry and Mental Health研究领域,Developmental Review的分区数为1区。Developmental Review在Psychiatry and Mental Health研究类别的506种相关期刊中排名第32。在Psychiatry and Mental Health领域,Developmental Review的排名百分位约为93%。

Developmental Review Impact Factor 2020-2021 Prediction

Developmental Review Impact Factor Predition System

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

Predict Check All Preditions
出版物总数
764
总引文数
99632

出版数量年度趋势

期刊引用年度趋势

国际合作趋势

引用文献趋势

影响因子历年数据分析

影响因子
影响因子
2019-2020 3.727
2018-2019 4.846
2017-2018 4.783
2016-2017 4.638
2015-2016 4.8
2014-2015 4.0
2013-2014 3.32
2012-2013 3.452
2011-2012 3.226
影响因子历年数据分析

· Developmental Review 2019-2020年的影响因子为3.727
· Developmental Review 2018-2019年的影响因子为4.846
· Developmental Review 2017-2018年的影响因子为4.783
· Developmental Review 2016-2017年的影响因子为4.638
· Developmental Review 2015-2016年的影响因子为4.8
· Developmental Review 2014-2015年的影响因子为4.0
· Developmental Review 2013-2014年的影响因子为3.32
· Developmental Review 2012-2013年的影响因子为3.452
· Developmental Review 2011-2012年的影响因子为3.226

出版物引用数趋势分析

出版数量 引用数量
出版数量 引用数量
1980 0 2
1981 32 25
1982 18 28
1983 28 82
1984 22 190
1985 16 242
1986 19 283
1987 17 308
1988 16 465
1989 19 462
1990 18 557
1991 18 856
1992 16 788
1993 22 706
1994 18 1062
1995 20 883
1996 18 1078
1997 22 1016
1998 20 1212
1999 21 1230
2000 18 1253
2001 17 1470
2002 22 1688
2003 15 1768
2004 19 2063
2005 16 1959
2006 19 2453
2007 17 2768
2008 20 3315
2009 11 3498
2010 21 4085
2011 11 4735
2012 15 5399
2013 16 5606
2014 17 6296
2015 32 6453
2016 14 6205
2017 15 6095
2018 30 5342
2019 17 6276
2020 19 8814
2021 3 616
出版物引用数趋势分析

· Developmental Review于1980年发表了0篇报告,并取得2篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于1981年发表了32篇报告,并取得25篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于1982年发表了18篇报告,并取得28篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于1983年发表了28篇报告,并取得82篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于1984年发表了22篇报告,并取得190篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于1985年发表了16篇报告,并取得242篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于1986年发表了19篇报告,并取得283篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于1987年发表了17篇报告,并取得308篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于1988年发表了16篇报告,并取得465篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于1989年发表了19篇报告,并取得462篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于1990年发表了18篇报告,并取得557篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于1991年发表了18篇报告,并取得856篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于1992年发表了16篇报告,并取得788篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于1993年发表了22篇报告,并取得706篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于1994年发表了18篇报告,并取得1062篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于1995年发表了20篇报告,并取得883篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于1996年发表了18篇报告,并取得1078篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于1997年发表了22篇报告,并取得1016篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于1998年发表了20篇报告,并取得1212篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于1999年发表了21篇报告,并取得1230篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于2000年发表了18篇报告,并取得1253篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于2001年发表了17篇报告,并取得1470篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于2002年发表了22篇报告,并取得1688篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于2003年发表了15篇报告,并取得1768篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于2004年发表了19篇报告,并取得2063篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于2005年发表了16篇报告,并取得1959篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于2006年发表了19篇报告,并取得2453篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于2007年发表了17篇报告,并取得2768篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于2008年发表了20篇报告,并取得3315篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于2009年发表了11篇报告,并取得3498篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于2010年发表了21篇报告,并取得4085篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于2011年发表了11篇报告,并取得4735篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于2012年发表了15篇报告,并取得5399篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于2013年发表了16篇报告,并取得5606篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于2014年发表了17篇报告,并取得6296篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于2015年发表了32篇报告,并取得6453篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于2016年发表了14篇报告,并取得6205篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于2017年发表了15篇报告,并取得6095篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于2018年发表了30篇报告,并取得5342篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于2019年发表了17篇报告,并取得6276篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于2020年发表了19篇报告,并取得8814篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review于2021年发表了3篇报告,并取得616篇引用文献。
· Developmental Review的总出版物为764。
· Developmental Review的总引用为99632。

Developmental Review
基本资讯
Developmental Review | Academic Accelerator - About the Journal

介绍

Presenting research that bears on important conceptual issues in developmental psychologists, Developmental Review: Perspectives in Behavior and Cognition provides child and developmental, child clinical psychologists with authoritative articles that reflect current thinking and cover significant scientific developments. The journal emphasizes human developmental processes and gives particular attention to research that is relevant to developmental psychology. Research has fundamental implications for the fields of pediatrics, psychiatry, and neuroscience, and increases the understanding of socialization processes. None

ISSN
0273-2297
ISSN

Developmental Review的ISSN是 0273-2297 ISSN是一个8位数的代码,用于识别各种报纸,期刊,杂志和期刊以及所有媒体 - 包括印刷版和电子版。

ISSN (Online)
1090-2406
ISSN (Online)

Developmental Review的ISSN(Online)是 1090-2406 . ISSN是一个8位数的代码,用于识别各种报纸,期刊,杂志和期刊以及所有媒体 - 包括印刷版和电子版。

出版社
Mosby Inc.
出版社

Developmental Review的出版社是 Mosby Inc.

出版频率
Quarterly
出版频率

Developmental Review publishes reports Quarterly .

出版年度
1981 - Present
出版年度

Developmental Review的出版年度包含 1981 - Present .

开放存取
NO
开放存取

Developmental Review传统订阅 (non-OA) 期刊。出版商拥有其期刊中文章的版权。任何想要阅读文章的人都应该由个人或机构支付费用来访问这些文章。任何人想以任何方式使用这些文章都必须获得出版商的许可。

出版费
Review
出版费

There is no publication fee for submiting manuscript to Developmental Review. Developmental Review 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.

语言
English
语言

The language of Developmental Review is English .

国家/地区
United States
国家/地区

The publisher of Developmental Review is Mosby Inc. , which locates in United States .

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.

Developmental Review | 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 Developmental Review Impact Factor IF measures the average number of citations received in a particular year (2020) by papers published in the Developmental Review 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 Developmental Review.

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)

什么是影响因子?

影响因子(IF)经常用作表明期刊对其领域重要性的指标。它是由科学信息研究所的创始人Eugene Garfield首次提出的。尽管IF被机构和临床医生广泛使用,但是人们对于IF日记的计算方法,其意义以及如何利用它存在着广泛的误解。期刊的影响因子与同行评议过程的质量和期刊的内容质量等因素无关,而是一种反映对期刊,书籍,论文,项目报告,报纸上发表的文章的平均引用次数的度量,会议/研讨会论文集,在互联网上发布的文件,说明以及任何其他批准的文件。

Developmental Review | Academic Accelerator - About the Impact Factor

影响因子通常用于评估期刊在其领域内的相对重要性,以及衡量期刊在特定时间段内引用“平均文章”的频率。发表更多评论文章的期刊将获得最高的IF。 IF较高的期刊被认为比IF较低的期刊更重要。根据尤金·加菲尔德(Eugene Garfield)的说法,“影响只是反映期刊和编辑吸引最佳论文的能力。”发表更多评论文章的期刊将获得最大的IF。