Based on this rationale, research studies are often evaluated, in part, by the prestige of the scientific journals in which they are published and by how often they are subsequently cited in the scientific literature by other researchers and professional colleagues.

Objective measures are available for both of these criteria, using data published regularly in the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) and the Journal Citation Reports (JCR).

The SSCI is a quarterly publication that lists, alphabetically by author, all articles that have been cited in scientific journals during that time period and the bibliographic reference for the articles that have cited them.

The JCR compiles data from the SSCI to report an impact factor for individual academic journals. The impact factor describes the average frequency with which articles in a particular journal are cited. It is computed as the number of times any article from that journal is cited during the first 2 years following its publication divided by the total number of articles published in that journal during the time period.

To provide a simplified example, suppose that a particular journal published 25 articles in 1990, and those 25 articles were subsequently cited a combined total of 125 times between 1990 and 1992. The journal's impact factor for 1990 would be 125/25 or 5.0.

Although the impact factor has limitations, it is widely used by librarians, information scientists, and researchers from a variety of disciplines as an objective indicator of a journal's quality, value, and impact.

1994 Impact

1994 Rank

1995 Impact

1995 Rank

2005 Impact

2005 Rank

Examples of Higher-Ranked Journals

4.209

4 of 97

5.304

4 of 84

6.46

4 of 101

Examples of Lower-Ranked Journals

New Zealand Journal of Psychology

0.238

71 of 97

0.000

84 of 84

0.581

57 of 101

Outlets for Cameron Group's Research

0.153

83 of 97

0.187

67 of 84

0.214

89 of 101

The average number of citations for a paper published in the highest-ranked journals (e.g., Psychological Review in 1994, Psychological Bulletin in 1995) was approximately seven or higher. In other words, articles published in these journals were cited, on average, at least seven times during the two years after their initial publication.

All of the journals used by the Cameron group were in the lower half of the rankings and, in many cases, near the bottom. For those journals, the impact factors were substantially less than 1.0, meaning that the average article published in them was not cited at all in the two years after its initial publication.

Adolescence was categorized as a Developmental Psychology journal in the JCR, and is listed in the table below, along with examples of high- and low-ranked journals in that category for 1994, 1995, and 2005. In addition to impact factors, the numerical rank for journals within their respective categories for each year are listed.

Two of the top-ranked developmental psychology journals (Child Development and Developmental Psychology) had impact scores that ranged from approximately 2.1 to 3.4. For the lower-ranked journals, the impact factor was less than 0.41.

1994 Impact

1994 Rank

1995 Impact

1995 Rank

2005 Impact

2005 Rank

Examples of Higher-Ranked Journals

Examples of Lower-Ranked Journals

Praxis der Kinderpsychologie
und Kinderpsychiatrie

0.176

32 of 32

0.227

35 of 36

0.242

51 of 52

Outlet for Cameron Group's Research

As with the general psychology journals in which the Cameron group has published, Adolescence ranked near the bottom of journals in its field and had an impact factor less than 1.0.

Note: The Nebraska Medical Journal, in which Cameron et al. (1985) first published their survey results, could not be included because it wasn't among the nearly 1,500 journals listed in the JCR.

Year

Impact Rating

Ranking Among General Psychology Journals

.242

69 of 97

Psychological Reports publishes a larger number of articles and has a lower rejection rate than is typical for psychology journals. According to JCR in 1994 and 1995, for example, Psychological Reports was the third largest journal for which statistics were collected, publishing 510 articles in 1994 and 504 articles in 1995.

Psychological Reports is also different from the vast majority of psychology and social science journals in that it requires contributing authors to pay a fee (in recent years, $27.50 per page). The practice of charging a per-page fee or requiring purchase of preprinted copies of the article is rare in psychological and social science journals. Such per-page fees are not charged by the high-prestige psychology journals (e.g., those published by the American Psychological Association and the Association for Psychological Science).
 

Thus, the Cameron group has published its empirical research in academic journals with low prestige and, at least in the case of Psychological Reports, with a low rejection rate and a publication fee required from authors.

Given the serious methodological flaws in their survey studies and obituary study, it is reasonable to conclude that the Cameron group's papers would have been rejected by more prestigious scientific journals.

This observation is not intended to disparage all of the articles published by Psychological Reports and the other journals used by the Cameron group. However, the present critique demonstrates that the papers published in those journals cannot automatically be assumed to meet high scientific standards. Rather, they must be critically evaluated by the reader on a case-by-case basis.

Based on data from the SSCI, here are the frequencies with which the papers published by the Cameron group reporting original data (from the 1983-84 surveys, the obituaries study, and an earlier survey by Cameron & Ross) were cited in academic journals indexed by the SSCI through September, 2007. This includes non-scientific journals (e.g., law, humanities) as well as scientific sources. Self-citations, that is, citations by the Cameron group of their own work, are excluded.

Many of these citations are from articles that were critical of the Cameron group's methods or conclusions. Others cited a Cameron group paper as a source for antigay statements. Some are from papers that attempted to comprehensively cite every published paper on a particular topic or in a particular journal during a given time period. It clearly is not the case that the Cameron group's research has provided insights into social or psychological phenomena upon which other researchers have built.

Were it not for the sensationalist uses to which they have been put by the Cameron group, the group's data would probably be totally unknown to the US public.

Cameron, P., Proctor, K., Coburn, W., & Forde, N. (1985). Sexual orientation and sexually transmitted diseases. Nebraska Medical Journal, 70, 292-299.

Cameron, P., Proctor, K., Coburn, W., Forde, N., Larson, H., & Cameron, K. (1986). Child molestation and homosexuality. Psychological Reports, 58, 327-337.

Cameron, P., Cameron, K., & Proctor, K. (1988). Homosexuals in the armed forces. Psychological Reports, 62, 211-219.

Cameron, P., & Cameron, K. (1988). Reply to Boor and Duncan. Psychological Reports, 62, 490.

Cameron, P., Cameron, K., & Proctor, K. (1989). Effect of homosexuality upon public health and social order. Psychological Reports, 64, 1167-1179.

Cameron, P., Playfair, W. L., & Wellum, S. (1994). The longevity of homosexuals: Before and after the AIDS epidemic. Omega, 29, 249-272.

Cameron, P., & Cameron, K. (1995). Does incest cause homosexuality? Psychological Reports, 76, 611-621.

Cameron, P., & Cameron, K. (1996). Homosexual parents. Adolescence, 31, 757-776.

Cameron, P., & Cameron, K. (1996). Do homosexual teachers pose a risk to pupils? Journal of Psychology, 130, 603-613.

Boor, M. (1988). Homosexuals in the armed forces: A reply to Cameron, Cameron, and Proctor. Psychological Reports, 62, 488.

Boor, M. (1988). Homosexuals in the armed forces: A rejoinder to the reply by Cameron and Cameron. Psychological Reports, 62, 602.

Buffardi, L. C., & Nichols, J. A. (1981). Citation impact, acceptance rate, and APA journals. American Psychologist, 36, 1453-1456.

Darves-Bornoz, J.-M., Choquet, M., Ledoux, S., Gasquet, I., & Manfredi, R. (1998). Gender differences in symptoms of adolescents reporting sexual assault. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 33, 111-117.

Duncan, D. F. (1988). Homosexuals in the armed forces: A comment on generalizability. Psychological Reports, 62, 489.

Herron, W. G., & Herron, M. J. (1996). The complexity of sexuality. Psychological Reports, 78, 129-130.

Schmidt, K. W., Krasnik, A., Brendstrup, E., Zoffman, H., & Larsen, S. O. (1989). Occurrence of sexual behaviour related to the risk of HIV infection. Danish Medical Bulletin, 36, 84-88.

Wardle, L.D. (1997). The potential impact of homopsexual parenting on children. University of Illinois Law Review, 3, 833-920.

Wellman, M. M. (1993). Child sexual abuse and gender differences: Attitudes and prevalence. Child Abuse & Neglect, 17, 539-547.

Whitley, B. E. Jr., & Kite, M. E. (1995). Sex differences in attitudes toward homosexuality: A comment on Oliver and Hyde (1993). Psychological Bulletin, 117, 146-154.

Blog   |   Contents   |   Publications   |   Library   |   Site Search   |   Contact Us   |   Useful Links   |   Social Psych Net