Anyway, what prompted this posting is an email I just received from Elsevier about how the impact factors of their archaeology journals are going up. I guess this is a good thing. I have long thought that archaeology journals have low impact factors (compared to journals in the sciences, for example). But look at the information below from Elsevier. Wow, archaeology trumps the history and philosophy of physics in journal impact measures! (Notice that Elsevier did NOT include any science journals for comparison).
Your should take these and other citation data with a grain of salt. If you want to read up on the topic, see the references below.
Please open the online version of this message if the HTML is not correctly displayed.
1999 The difficulty of achieving full coverage of international social science literature and the bibliometric consequences. Scientometrics 44:193-215.
2007 Caveats for the Use of Citation Indicators in Resesarch and Journal Evaluations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 59:278-287.
Nederhof, Anton J.
2006 Bibliometric monitoring of research performance in the Social Sciences and the Humanities: A Review. Scientometrics 66:81-100.
Nehlo, L.I. and K. Yang
n.d. A New Era in Citation and Bibliometric Analyses: Web of Science, Scopus, and Googld Scholar. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology in press.