Fooling around with numbers, part 5

As promised, here is the distribution of journal prices for the subsets of the Elsevier life sciences dataset which either have or don’t have impact factors, and for the entire UCOSC dataset (in which all journals have IFs):
plusminusIF.PNG
Each interval is $499: $0 to $499, $500 to $999, etc, and datapoints are plotted at the midpoint of each interval.
The conclusion is the same as in part 1, just a bit clearer now. Elsevier journals without an impact factor are priced lower than those which have an IF, and the price distributions are somewhat different between journals with and without an IF. Note, though, that if I’d used a $1000 interval instead of $500, the initial rise in the +IF curves would not appear; if these are power-law distributions the main difference is probably the scaling exponent. I think. (Math is not my friend.)
It almost looks as though low-end journals are shunted out of the lowest price bracket as soon as they get an IF, any IF, and then tend to increase in price as the IF goes up. Update: no it doesn’t. I don’t know what I was thinking there.

The rest of the series: part 1, part 2, part 3, part 4.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *