1 The Reference Return Ratio Jeppe Nicolaisen 1 and Tove Faber Frandsen 2 The Royal School of Library and Information Science Birketinget 6, DK-2300 Copenhagen S., DENMARK Abstract: The paper introduces a new journal impact measure called The Reference Return Ratio (3R). Unlike the traditional Journal Impact Factor (JIF), which is based on calculations of publications and citations, the new measure is based on calculations of bibliographic investments (references) and returns (citations). A comparative study of the two measures shows a strong relationship between the 3R and the JIF. Yet, the 3R appears to correct for citation habits, citation dynamics, and composition of document types – problems that typically are raised against the JIF. In addition, contrary to traditional impact measures, the 3R can not be manipulated ad infinitum through journal self-citations. 1. Introduction In his paper on the history of the development of the journal impact factor (JIF), Cameron (2005) highlights the usage of the measure in academia. He makes clear that the measure was originally invented to assist the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) in selecting journals for coverage in their various products. It was NOT intended to be used for other purposes. Yet, Cameron (2005, p. 113) concludes that “[w]e are left in a situation where impact factors are now routinely used to evaluate scientists, departments, entire institutions, and even nations”. Over the years, a number of alternative journal impact measures have been proposed (consult e.g. Glänzel & Moed, 2002). However, none of these measures appear to have had much impact on bibliometric research including research evaluation. Moed (2005, p. 1995) notes that “the […] journal impact measure is nowadays so widely dispersed and so frequently used that it seems difficult, if not impossible, to have it replaced by a single alternative measure, especially in the near future”. We fully agree. Moreover, as pointed out by Rousseau (2002), the quality of a journal is a multifaceted notion necessitating a whole battery of indicators. The aim of this paper is consequently not to introduce a single measure that can fully replace the JIF, but instead to present and discuss an additional measure for the battery. 1 jni@db.dk 2 tff@db.dk hprints-00328246, version 1 - 10 Oct 2008 Author manuscript, published in "Journal of Informetrics 2, 2 (2008) 128-135"