IF success, then celebrate!
Editing is more often than not a thankless job (look away now, potential Co-Editor-in-Chiefs). However, this is one of those rare happy moments when it all comes good. Yesterday, Thomson Reuters released the Journal Citation Report for 2015 and the BJPS continues its lead among philosophy of science journals, with an impact factor of 1.738.
The impact factor measures the average number of citations a paper receives. In this round, the IF is based on the number of citations in 2015 (113) of the papers we published in 2013 and 2014 (65). At the bottom of this post are tables of the two citation indexes in which the BJPS appears.
Of course, this the culmination of untold amounts of work is not just on the part of the editorial team here, but also on the part of our authors and referees.
Science Citation Index
|
Journal Title |
Impact Factor |
Five-Year Impact Factor |
|
British Journal for the Philosophy of Science |
1.738 |
1.737 |
|
Biology and Philosophy |
1.204 |
1.124 |
|
Philosophy of Science |
1.128 |
1.314 |
|
European Journal for Philosophy of Science |
0.829 |
1.060 |
|
Synthese |
0.723 |
0.815 |
|
Studies in History and Philosophy of Science |
0.719 |
0.692 |
|
Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics |
0.626 |
0.697 |
|
History and Philosophy of Logic |
0.25 |
0.286 |
Social Science Citation Index
|
Journal Title |
Impact Factor |
Five-Year Impact Factor |
|
British Journal for the Philosophy of Science |
1.738 |
1.737 |
|
Biology and Philosophy |
1.204 |
1.124 |
|
Philosophy of Science |
1.128 |
1.314 |
|
Synthese |
0.723 |
0.815 |
|
Studies in History and Philosophy of Science |
0.719 |
0.692 |
We know how to party