2017
DOI: 10.1590/2318-08892017000300011
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Bibliometric analysis of multi-language veterinary journals

Abstract: The purpose of this study was to investigate the association between language and total number of citations found among documents in journals written in English and other languages. We selected all the journals clustered together in the Journal Citation Reports 2014 under the subject category "Veterinary Sciences" and downloaded all the data registered between 1994-2013 by Web of Science for the journals that stated publishing documents in languages other than English. We classified each of these journals by q… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

1
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 19 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…One of the unexpected results of this study was that contributions from Anglophone countries have not increased even though AJVS modified the language of publication and its name at the end of 2016, turning it into a completely English-language journal. Moreover, the proportion of manuscripts authored by researchers from anglophone countries was 8.1% between 1994-2013, a time at which the proportion of English documents published by AJVS was 14.0% (Krauskopf et al 2017).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One of the unexpected results of this study was that contributions from Anglophone countries have not increased even though AJVS modified the language of publication and its name at the end of 2016, turning it into a completely English-language journal. Moreover, the proportion of manuscripts authored by researchers from anglophone countries was 8.1% between 1994-2013, a time at which the proportion of English documents published by AJVS was 14.0% (Krauskopf et al 2017).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%