The big graphs I posted earlier have so much information, that much of it gets lost in the mess of lines. So I’ve broken down the data to create a graph just involving each journal’s interactions with the other 31. Here are the graphs. (As always, click on each for a larger image.)
I don’t have a lot of commentary on these beyond what I’ve said already, but here are a few quick thoughts about them.
- When comparing different graphs, look at the scale before making judgments. The numbers are really different across journals.
- CJP is more balanced than other journals, especially on moral/political and history. The red bar near the start of the outer ring is a sign of how much it interacts with Ethics.
- Philosophical Studies is a huge part of the ecosystem. Partially that’s because of its size, but not entirely.
- By the citation numbers, Review of Metaphysics is basically a history journal at this stage, and Economics and Philosophy is, insofar as it is a philosophy journal, a moral/political journal.
- Mind has slightly more interactions with the logic journals than the other generalist journals do, but it isn’t dramatic.
- Looking at the history journals makes Philosophical Review’s interactions with them more prominent than it is on the larger graph.
- The difference between how much Episteme cites the American generalist journals and how much it cites the Commonwealth journals is fascinating. I don’t know how much this is the (quite normal) bias journals have towards journals that are geographically near them, and how much it reflects a different attitude towards epistemology in the US vs Commonwealth journals.
- The citations to Analysis are much more balanced across the generalist journals than I expected; I thought journals would differ in how much they wanted to engage with Analysis articles.