Figure 2 Distribution of journal articles with epistemic and linguistic aspects across time intervals with detailed focus in timeframes 2007 2014.
However, a closer examination of the journal titles shows that the distribution of journal titles is rather skewed, with three journals accounting for more than half of the journal population: Research Policy (35 %), Journal of Technology Transfer (12%%) and Technovation (5%%).
The distribution of journal domain classifications for the log data obtained from each provider indicates its degree of coverage for the different domains in the AAT.
When analyzing the total amount of citations in the Science vs. Social Science edition of the 2007 edition of JCR, a distribution of journal domains emerges that is heavily skewed towards the natural sciences as opposed to the social sciences and humanities, respectively 92.8% vs. 7.2%.
The main body of this article includes bibliometric analyses in the publishing year, document type, subject categories, publication distribution, patterns of journals, countries/regions, institutes and authors [ 20, 21].
In conclusion, the distribution of scientific journals according to their impact creates a longtail distribution: only a small percentage has high impact, most journals are of very low impact, and it is this bulk of low impact journals that creates the longtail.
While the dissemination of that research relied on the printing and distribution of academic journals, the publishers' subscription model was a sensible way to manage this business.
The comet-like distribution of scientific journals has changed [2]: the historic obstacles in the nucleus have melted, and the comet now contains a new resident, The Journal of Headache and Pain.
In Table 1, we present the distribution of the journals included in our analysis with regard to region and subject category.
The distribution of scientific journals plotted according to their SJR value (citation impact) seen in figure 1 is a typical example of the longtail distribution first described by the social economist Pareto [15].
