Back to Law Journals: Submissions and Ranking database See below for Ranking methodology, Combined-score, Impact-factor, Currency-factor, and Cites per Cost IntroductionThe purpose of the Law Journals webpage is to allow authors to find law journals by subject, country, or journal rank (where available), to display journal editorial information, and to facilitate an author's article submission to those journals. Most bar journals, magazines, and newsletters are excluded from this list. Also excluded are law journals that have few English language articles (except for a few U.S. Spanish language and Canadian French language journals). The default listing is alphabetical by journal name. If a rank-order is chosen, by clicking on one or more checkboxes in the center of the menu area, then the list will sort in rank order. Clicking on the column headers for each numeric rank list will re-sort to that rank. Clicking on the "Journal" header above the journal titles column will re-sort alphabetically. It's not necessary, when using the author submission process, to select any of the rank choices, if none is chosen the list defaults to ordering by the most recent combined-score of impact-factor and total cites. If the user selects more than one rank checkbox then the list will rank by the checkbox that is closest to the top and then closest to the left of the checkbox choice area. General/Specialized, Country, and Student-edited/Peer-edited/RefereedBy selecting the appropriate checkboxes the journal list may be limited to combinations of:
Journal Subjects
Journal Name Search
Limiting to journals within a Range of Rankings
Impact-Factor Weighting
Checkboxes next to Journal Names
Author Submissions
Exclude Online Journals
Exclude Nonranked
Information About the Journal Ranking MethodologySee also, Impact-Factor, Currency-Factor, Combined-Score and Cites per Cost Counted citations are those which cite journal volumes published in the preceding eight years. The reason for this limit is to prevent a bias in favor of long-published journals. Thus the study is concerned only with citations to current scholarship. The search results give only the number of citing documents, and do not show where a citing article or case cites to two or more articles in a cited legal periodical. Sources for the citation counts are limited to documents in Westlaw's JLR database (primarily U.S. articles), and in Westlaw's ALLCASES database (U.S. federal/state cases). The searches conducted in those databases generally look for a Bluebook format in use in the U.S. (volume journal [page] year) but the searches are flexible in allowing the year to occur within 8 words of the journal name. The list includes periodicals that began publication after the survey period began. Rank results based on total citation counts are unfair to those periodicals, and whenever a journal recently began publication a warning has been supplied next to the periodical name in the form of a parenthetical date such as "(2001- )". Both impact-factor and combined-score rankings do make an allowance for how recently the journal began publishing. Legal periodicals which appear to have ceased publication (even though they were published during a part of the survey period) are usually not included.
Anyone wishing to see the text of the searches run in the JLR and ALLCASES databases should look at:
General: 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 or Specialized: 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 The "Journals" column(s) shows the number of articles that cite to each journal (within our date period) that were found in the full-text Westlaw journals database "Journals and Law Reviews (JLR)". To see what sources are included in the JLR Database see the Westlaw description at directory.westlaw.com/scope/default.asp?db=JLR&RS=WDIR1.0&VR=1.0. The scope note in that Westlaw description describes the JLR content as, "The JLR database contains documents from law reviews, CLE course materials, and bar journals. A document is an article, a note, a symposium contribution, or other materials published in one of the available periodicals". The "Cases" column(s) shows the number of cases that cite to each journal (within our date period) that were found in the full-text Westlaw state and federal case database "Federal & State Case Law (ALLCASES)". To see what sources are included in the ALLCASES Database see the Westlaw description at directory.westlaw.com/scope/default.asp?db=ALLCASES&RS=WDIR1.0&VR=1.0. The scope note in that Westlaw description describes the ALLCASES content as, decisions from the "U.S. Supreme Court, courts of appeals, former circuit courts, district courts, bankruptcy courts, former Court of Claims, Court of Federal Claims, Tax Court, related federal and territorial courts, military courts, the state courts of all 50 states and the local courts of the District of Columbia." Comparisons between the 2000-2007, 1999-2006, 1998-2005, 1997-2004, and 1996-2003 citation counts cannot be made precisely. Although the number of years covered by each ranking column is an identical 8 years, the size of the JLR and ALLCASES databases for each of the rotated periods increases by approximately 2%-3% in each later period. Thus, a small percentage increase in the number of documents citing to a journal may be accounted for by an increase in the total number of documents in the database. Searches for citing documents (taking the 2000-2007 period as an example) usually look for citations within the full-text articles/cases that have one of the volume numbers published for the journal from 2000 onwards (i.e. where the journal has labeled the issue as 2000..2007), followed immediately by the journal abbreviation/name, and within 8 words a year designation of 2000-2007. A further condition is that any document (case or article) in which such a citation occurs must be dated (in Westlaw's 'date' field) as 2000 onwards, and must have been added to the Westlaw JLR or ALLCASES database during the years 2000-2007. These dates should be adjusted for an explanation of other rotated 8 year periods. As the searches are full-text searches they are naturally prone to some error due to variant citation form in the citing cases/articles. Searches for citation patterns roughly follow the Harvard Blue Book format, usually, VOLUME JOURNAL ... YEAR. Citations that are not in the usual format for legal citations may not have been found. Effort was made to allow for different forms of journal name citations (e.g. allowing for the ALWD citation format) but not all can be retrieved. The citation counts for citations to non-U.S. periodicals are likely to be less accurate than those for U.S. periodicals because non-U.S. legal citation formats are often severely abbreviated.
Westlaw's treatment of periods and spaces within character strings is difficult to understand and is part of the reason why so many alternate cite forms were used.
The combined-score is a composite of each journal's impact-factor and total cites count. The combined-score is, by default, weighted with approximately a third of the weight given to impact-factor and two-thirds given to total cites. The resulting score is then normalized. Users may alter the default weight (0.34) by entering any decimal number between 0 and 1. If "0" is entered then the combined-score ranking will ignore impact-factor and produce a normalized ranking by total cites, and if "1" is entered then the combined-score ranking will ignore total cites and produce a normalized ranking by impact-factor. It's recommended that users not change the weighting value unless there's an interest in seeing a normalized ranking for either impact-factor or total cites.
Combined-score ranking is based on the idea proposed by Ronen Perry that neither ranking by total cites nor by impact-factor are in themselves sufficient, and need to be combined. See, Ronen Perry, The Relative Value of American Law Reviews: Refinement and Implementation, 39 Conn. L. Rev. 1 (2006), available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=897063. The problem in any combined ranking is what weight to give to the underlying factors. Perry calculated a weight of 0.577 for impact-factor (and thus 0.433 for total cites) based on the idea that Harvard Law Review and Yale Law Journal have equal prestige, and 0.577 is the weight that makes the combined impact-factor and total-cites counts equal for these journals (over the survey period of 1998-2005). However, the default weighting used on the website is a value of 0.34. It was decided to use 0.34 because that weighting gives Harvard the highest combined-rank over each of 13 ranking surveys (1988-1995...2000-2007) (with the exception of the period 1991-1998 when Harvard was at 98 and Yale 100). Use of 0.34 as the weighting between impact-factor and total cites also aims to maximize the average of Yale Law Journal's rank during those same years. While Harvard Law Review and Yale Law Journal are generally considered comparable, Harvard is widely regarded as the gold-standard and deserves an edge over this period. It is expected that the 0.34 weighting will continue to be used in future annual surveys, and thus Harvard Law Review may at some time drop below a normalized combined-score ranking of 100.
In order to more fairly compare new journals with established journals an adjustment to the combined-score is made for journals which, at the survey date, have been in existence for less than 8 years. For example a journal that began in 2005 will, for the 2007 ranking, have its total cites multiplied by 7.3 (that total cites extrapolation does not display in the total cites column - it is used only in the combined-score formula). The aim is to estimate from the cites to a journal over its few years of life how many cites the journal would likely have had, had it been in existence for at least 8 years. The multipliers are as follows (where the digit before the parenthical is the difference between the survey year and the year the journal began): 0(29) 1(29) 2(7.3) 3(3.4) 4(2.3) 5(1.6) 6(1.3). Impact-factor shows the average number of annual citations to articles in each journal (rounded to two decimal places). Impact-factor rankings should be used cautiously as they are biased against journals that publish a larger number of shorter articles, such as book reviews. Nevertheless, if two legal journals have a similar composition of articles, notes, and book reviews, then from an author's viewpoint it's reasonable to compare the impact-factor of each to see which is a better journal with which to publish. The implication of a similar ranking by total citations, but a dissimilar ranking by impact-factor is that the journal ranked lower by impact-factor is publishing some articles of lesser quality, or of less general interest. It's suggested that in preference to using impact-factor, the combined-score ranking (a weighting of both impact-factor and total cites) offers a more balanced view of journal ranking. The method by which impact-factor is calculated is to conduct each of the Westlaw searches for citing articles in 8 separate yearly slices, the same search for each yearly slice, except that the added-date field is changed in each search like: AD(1996), AD(1997), ..., AD(2003). The number of citing articles from each yearly slice of additions to Westlaw are divided by the cumulative number of items that each yearly slice is likely to have cited. For example, if the survey period is 1996-2003 then the yearly slice of 1996 articles added to Westlaw will be citing 1996 articles, and the yearly slice of 1997 articles will be citing 1996 and 1997 articles, until we reach the 2003 yearly slice which will be citing articles from 1996 through 2003. Assuming each year that a journal steadily publishes 20 items, then if the number of citing articles from the 1997 slice is 30 then that year's impact-factor is 30/40=0.75. Should the number of citing articles in the 2003 slice be 100 then that year's impact-factor is 100/160=0.62. Then in order to throw out the less representative outliers the median of those values is recorded as the journal's impact-factor (usually for an 8 year publication range that will be the average of the two impact-factors closest to mid-range). In other words impact-factor is the median of the journal's annual impact-factors, and those annual IFs are calculated by taking the number of citing articles added to the JLR database in that year and dividing that by the number of items published by the journal in that year and any other year back to the beginning of the survey period. The basic methodological difficulty is one of determining the number of articles published by each journal for the date period, there being no completely satisfactory and automated method for doing this. Most of the article quantity data (at least for the higher ranked journals) was obtained from the WilsonWeb Index to Legal Periodicals. "Articles" meaning any entry that ILP indexes, such as forewords, letters, notes, book reviews, as well as more traditional articles. Note that ILP has had different inclusion policies for its indexing over the years: up to the year 1999 items with less than 5 pages were not included. Then through the year 2002 items with less than 2 pages were not included, and in subsequent years items with less than half a page were not included. After the first preference of ILP, if it was necessary to check journals or volumes in other databases, then the next preference was Westlaw (if Westlaw comprehensively added articles for the years needed), followed by Lexis, then Legal Resource Index, then Legal Journals Index (UK), then any other index in which the journal was indexed. Often a manual count was made by physically examining the tables of contents for the journal years needed. In cases where indexing was not available and a manual count was not feasible, then an extrapolation was made from what was known. As these variant sources undoubtedly have differing definitions as to what is a countable entity this introduces variability into the counts. Look at the data files, General: 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 or Specialized: 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 to see what databases were used to count the number of published articles for each journal. Note that in January 2008 when the 2000-2007 survey was made available there was no certainty as to how many articles were published by journals in 2007 so all journals had their article output estimated for 2007 (based on an average of the previous several years). That number will be corrected later in 2008 and may lead to small adjustments in rankings. Currency-FactorCurrency-factor aims to compare journals on how rapidly their articles become cited. It examines a three-year interval looking at how many articles in Westlaw's JLR database, made available during those three years, cite items published by a journal and dated during those same three years. Taking the example of the 2000-2007 survey period; currency-factor is the number of articles added to Westlaw's JLR database in the three-year period of 2000-2002 that cite to volumes of a journal dated during those same three years, divided by the number of items published by the journal during those same years. It would have been desirable to create this index from the final three years of the survey period, but the data on which it's based, being automatically created from annual data collected to calculate impact-factor, is in a form requiring the use of the first three years of each survey period. For any journal that began publication after the beginning of the survey period the three years will be the first three years of the journal's existence. Cites per CostThe Cites per Cost ranking is the average yearly number of cites to the journal divided by the annual US$ cost to U.S. academic libraries. So e.g., a journal with 600 cites per annum and costing $60 would show '10' in the Cites per Cost column.
Journals that are free are ignored for the purpose of this ranking. Strictly they should have an infinite score (cites/0) and be at the top of the ranking, however the purpose of this ranking is to present a cost-effective analysis for purchasing decisions, so ranking free journals seems to counter that purpose. "Average yearly number of cites" is the yearly average of cites as determined by the law journal rankings in the law journal submission information data, and its inclusion methodology (described further above) should be kept in mind. The year the journal began publication is also considered for recently started journals. So the actual calculation is: To see the cost for law journals you can go to http://lawlib.wlu.edu/selecting.aspx which is a webpage that fits journals (ranked by cites/cost) into a user-supplied budget amount. Note that the list includes all U.S. journals but only selected non-U.S. journals. |
|||||||||