Research Policy
最新影響指數 - 實時趨勢預測 & 期刊影響力排名







One-click to visualize your research performance

One-click to visualize your research performance

One-click to visualize your research performance

One-click to visualize your research performance

Highly Cited Articles

Research Policy

High Impact Research Articles
Publication Title Author Listing
Publication Title Author Listing
· · ·
· · ·
· · · ·
· ·
· ·
· · ·
· · · ·
· · ·
· ·
· · · ·
· · ·
· · · ·
· · · ·
· ·
· · ·
· · ·
· · · · ·
· ·
· · ·
· ·
· · · · ·
· ·
· ·
· · · ·
· ·
· ·
· · ·
· · ·

Highly Cited Keywords

Research Policy

High Impact Research Keywords



Research Policy

Research Policy 2020-2021 年的影響指數為8.11。

Research Policy Impact Factor
最高影響指數 IF

近十年Research Policy的最高影響指數為8.11。

最低影響指數 IF

近十年Research Policy的最低影響指數為2.52。

影響指數 累積成長率
影響指數 累積成長率

近十年Research Policy的影響指數累積成長率為221.8%。

影響指數 平均成長率
影響指數 平均成長率

近十年Research Policy的影響指數平均成長率為22.2%。


子領域 四分位數 排名 百分比
Management Science and Operations Research Q1 4/166

Management Science and Operations Research 97%

Strategy and Management Q1 12/440

Strategy and Management 97%

Management of Technology and Innovation Q1 9/248

Management of Technology and Innovation 96%


· 在Management Science and Operations Research研究領域,Research Policy的四分位數為Q1。Research Policy在Management Science and Operations Research研究類別的166種相關期刊中排名第4。在Management Science and Operations Research研究領域,Research Policy的排名百分位約為97%。
· 在Strategy and Management研究領域,Research Policy的四分位數為Q1。Research Policy在Strategy and Management研究類別的440種相關期刊中排名第12。在Strategy and Management研究領域,Research Policy的排名百分位約為97%。
· 在Management of Technology and Innovation研究領域,Research Policy的四分位數為Q1。Research Policy在Management of Technology and Innovation研究類別的248種相關期刊中排名第9。在Management of Technology and Innovation研究領域,Research Policy的排名百分位約為96%。

Research Policy Impact Factor 2022 Prediction

Research Policy Impact Factor Predition System

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

Predict Check All Preditions






2020-2021 8.11
2019-2020 5.351
2018-2019 5.425
2017-2018 4.661
2016-2017 4.495
2015-2016 3.47
2014-2015 3.117
2013-2014 2.598
2012-2013 2.85
2011-2012 2.52

· Research Policy 2020-2021年的影響指數為8.11
· Research Policy 2019-2020年的影響指數為5.351
· Research Policy 2018-2019年的影響指數為5.425
· Research Policy 2017-2018年的影響指數為4.661
· Research Policy 2016-2017年的影響指數為4.495
· Research Policy 2015-2016年的影響指數為3.47
· Research Policy 2014-2015年的影響指數為3.117
· Research Policy 2013-2014年的影響指數為2.598
· Research Policy 2012-2013年的影響指數為2.85
· Research Policy 2011-2012年的影響指數為2.52


出版數量 引用數量
出版数量 引用数量
1971 6 1
1972 13 1
1973 14 7
1974 21 7
1975 24 19
1976 13 27
1977 18 58
1978 18 37
1979 17 77
1980 12 85
1981 15 112
1982 21 112
1983 20 166
1984 18 209
1985 23 264
1986 33 345
1987 23 423
1988 47 616
1989 49 566
1990 46 817
1991 48 998
1992 41 1043
1993 65 1365
1994 63 1643
1995 60 1946
1996 75 2268
1997 51 2352
1998 88 3112
1999 48 3440
2000 71 4345
2001 100 5711
2002 96 7195
2003 126 9795
2004 110 11733
2005 117 14328
2006 105 17542
2007 112 20905
2008 152 25178
2009 150 30951
2010 121 34718
2011 117 40737
2012 140 46473
2013 145 47609
2014 140 51576
2015 144 54715
2016 162 49290
2017 141 46687
2018 164 42905
2019 194 49560
2020 174 61438
2021 41 5232

· Research Policy於1971年發表了6篇报告,並取得1篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於1972年發表了13篇报告,並取得1篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於1973年發表了14篇报告,並取得7篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於1974年發表了21篇报告,並取得7篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於1975年發表了24篇报告,並取得19篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於1976年發表了13篇报告,並取得27篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於1977年發表了18篇报告,並取得58篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於1978年發表了18篇报告,並取得37篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於1979年發表了17篇报告,並取得77篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於1980年發表了12篇报告,並取得85篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於1981年發表了15篇报告,並取得112篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於1982年發表了21篇报告,並取得112篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於1983年發表了20篇报告,並取得166篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於1984年發表了18篇报告,並取得209篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於1985年發表了23篇报告,並取得264篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於1986年發表了33篇报告,並取得345篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於1987年發表了23篇报告,並取得423篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於1988年發表了47篇报告,並取得616篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於1989年發表了49篇报告,並取得566篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於1990年發表了46篇报告,並取得817篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於1991年發表了48篇报告,並取得998篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於1992年發表了41篇报告,並取得1043篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於1993年發表了65篇报告,並取得1365篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於1994年發表了63篇报告,並取得1643篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於1995年發表了60篇报告,並取得1946篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於1996年發表了75篇报告,並取得2268篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於1997年發表了51篇报告,並取得2352篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於1998年發表了88篇报告,並取得3112篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於1999年發表了48篇报告,並取得3440篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於2000年發表了71篇报告,並取得4345篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於2001年發表了100篇报告,並取得5711篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於2002年發表了96篇报告,並取得7195篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於2003年發表了126篇报告,並取得9795篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於2004年發表了110篇报告,並取得11733篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於2005年發表了117篇报告,並取得14328篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於2006年發表了105篇报告,並取得17542篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於2007年發表了112篇报告,並取得20905篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於2008年發表了152篇报告,並取得25178篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於2009年發表了150篇报告,並取得30951篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於2010年發表了121篇报告,並取得34718篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於2011年發表了117篇报告,並取得40737篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於2012年發表了140篇报告,並取得46473篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於2013年發表了145篇报告,並取得47609篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於2014年發表了140篇报告,並取得51576篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於2015年發表了144篇报告,並取得54715篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於2016年發表了162篇报告,並取得49290篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於2017年發表了141篇报告,並取得46687篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於2018年發表了164篇报告,並取得42905篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於2019年發表了194篇报告,並取得49560篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於2020年發表了174篇报告,並取得61438篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy於2021年發表了41篇报告,並取得5232篇文獻引用。
· Research Policy的總出版物為3812。
· Research Policy的總引用數為700739。

Research Policy
Research Policy | Academic Accelerator - About the Journal


Research Policy (RP) is a multi-disciplinary journal devoted to analyzing, understanding and effectively responding to the economic, policy, management, organizational, environmental and other challenges posed by innovation, technology, R&D and science. This includes a number of related activities concerned with the creation of knowledge (through research), the diffusion and acquisition of knowledge (e.g. through organizational learning), and its exploitation in the form of new or improved products, processes or services. None


Research Policy的ISSN是 0048-7333 ISSN是一個8位數的代碼,用於識別各種報紙,期刊,雜誌和期刊以及所有媒體 - 包括印刷版和電子版。

ISSN (Online)
ISSN (Online)

Research Policy的ISSN(Online)是 - . ISSN是一個8位數的代碼,用於識別各種報紙,期刊,雜誌和期刊以及所有媒體 - 包括印刷版和電子版。


Research Policy的出版社是 Elsevier


Research Policy publishes reports Bimonthly .


Research Policy的出版年度包含 1971-2021 .



Dutch, Flemish

The language of Research Policy is Dutch, Flemish .


The publisher of Research Policy is Elsevier , which locates in Netherlands .

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.

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


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.


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


  • A vetted, established metric for measuring journal impact within a discipline.
  • Designed to eliminate bias based on journal size and frequency.
  • 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.


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)


影響指數(IF)經常用作表明期刊對其領域重要性的指標。它是由科學信息研究所的創始人Eugene Garfield首次提出的。儘管IF被機構和臨床醫生廣泛使用,但是人們對於IF日記的計算方法,其意義以及如何利用它存在著廣泛的誤解。期刊的影響指數與同行評議過程的質量和期刊的內容質量等因素無關,而是一種反映對期刊,書籍,論文,項目報告,報紙上發表的文章的平均引用次數的度量,會議/研討會論文集,在互聯網上發布的文件,說明以及任何其他批准的文件。

Research Policy | Academic Accelerator - About the Impact Factor

影響指數通常用於評估期刊在其領域內的相對重要性,以及衡量期刊在特定時間段內引用“平均文章”的頻率。發表更多評論文章的期刊將獲得最高的IF。 IF較高的期刊被認為比IF較低的期刊更重要。根據尤金·加菲爾德(Eugene Garfield)的說法,“影響只是反映期刊和編輯吸引最佳論文的能力。”發表更多評論文章的期刊將獲得最大的IF。