Do subjective journal ratings represent whole journals or typical articles? Unweighted or weighted citation impact?

This study uses journal ratings in criminology and criminal justice, library and information science, public administration, and social work to investigate two research questions: (1) Are stated preference (subjective) journal ratings more closely related to size-dependent citation metrics (eigenfactor and total citations, which represent the impact of the journal as a whole) or to size-independent citation metrics (article influence and CiteScore, which represent the impact of a typical article)? (2) Are stated preference ratings more closely related to unweighted citation metrics (five-year impact factor and source normalized impact per publication, which do not account for the impact of each citing journal) or to weighted citation metrics (article influence and SCImago journal rank, which do)? Within the disciplines evaluated here, respondents' subjective ratings of journals are more closely related to size-independent metrics and weighted metrics. The relative strength of the relationship between subjective ratings and size-independent metrics is moderated by subject area and other factors, while the relative strength of the relationship between subjective ratings and weighted metrics is consistent across all four disciplines. These results are discussed with regard to popularity and prestige, which are sometimes associated with unweighted and weighted citation metrics, respectively. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.