Relationship of Input and Output Variables with DEA (Data Envelopment Analysis) Approach: Efficiency Implementation Study in Library Science Journal SINTA 2 and 3

Cecep Ibrahim* -  Universitas Halu Oleo

DOI : 10.24269/pls.v7i2.7778

When the impact produced by the output variable (H-Index) is greater than that of the input variable (Impact Factor), the quality of a journal is said to be efficient. This investigation aims to evaluate the effectiveness of SINTA 2 and 3-indexed library science journals. This study examines the relationship between input and output variables using the Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) method to measure efficiency in a library science journal that is indexed by SINTA accredited 2 and 3. A data-driven technique for calculating the full factor efficiency of homogeneous decision units is called data envelopment analysis (DEA). If the impact produced by the ranking of the output variable (H-Index) is greater than that of the input variable (Impact Factor), then the Library Science Journal is said to be efficient. Four out of the eight library science journals indexed by SINTA 2 and 3 are deemed efficient, according to the study's findings. Jurnal Berkala Ilmu Perpustakaan dan Informasi, Jurnal Baca Dokumentasi dan Informasi, Jurnal Kajian Informasi dan Perpustakaan, dan Jurnal Pustakaloka: Jurnal Kajian Informasi dan Perpustakaan.
Keywords
DEA, efficiency, library journal, bibliometric
  1. Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A., & Pugini, F. (2008). The measurement of Italian universities’ research productivity by a non parametric-bibliometric methodology. Scientometrics, 76(2), 225–244. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1942-2
  2. Adila, N. (2022). Implementation of Web Scraping for Journal Data Collection on the SINTA Website. Sinkron, 7(4), 2478–2485. https://doi.org/10.33395/sinkron.v7i4.11576
  3. Ahmar, A. S., Kurniasih, N., Irawan, D. E., Sutiksno, D. U., Napitupulu, D., Setiawan, M. I., Simarmata, J., Hidayat, R., Busro, Abdullah, D., Rahim, R., & Abraham, J. (2018). Lecturers’ Understanding on Indexing Databases of SINTA, DOAJ, Google Scholar, SCOPUS, and Web of Science: A study of Indonesians. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 954. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/954/1/012026
  4. Anand, A., Kringelum, L. B., Madsen, C. Ø., & Selivanovskikh, L. (2021). Interorganizational learning: a bibliometric review and research agenda. The Learning Organization, 28(2), 111–136. https://doi.org/10.1108/TLO-02-2020-0023ï
  5. Braun, T., Glanzel, W., & Andras S, S. (2013). A Hirsch-type index for journals. Scientometrics, 69(1), 169–173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-01
  6. Campbell, K., W. Vick, D., D. Murray, A., & F. Little, G. (1999). Journal Publishing, Journal Reputation, and the United Kingdom’s Research Assesment Exercise. Journal of Law and Society, 26, 470–501. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6478.00137
  7. Chen, K., Yang, G., & Khoveyni, M. (2017). Measuring Performance Evolution of Academic Journals in Management Science and Operations Research: A DEA-Malmquist Approach. Journal of Management Science and Engineering, 2(1), 34–54. https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1383.201002
  8. Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M., & Zhu, J. (2011). Data Envelopment Analysis: History, Models, and Interpretations. In International Series in Operations Research and Management Science (Vol. 164). Springer New York LLC. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6151-8_1
  9. Durieux, V., & Gevenois, P. A. (2010). Bibliometric Indicators: Quality Measurements of Scientific Publication. Radiology, 255(2), 342–351. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.09090626
  10. Evans, J. R., Foster, S. T., & Linderman, K. (2014). A content analysis of research in quality management and a proposed agenda for future research. In Quality Management Journal (Vol. 21, Issue 2, pp. 17–44). American Society for Quality. https://doi.org/10.1080/10686967.2014.11918383
  11. Fatimah, S., & Mahmudah, D. U. (2017). Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA): Pengukuran Efisiensi Kinerja Sekolah Dasar. Cakrawala Pendidikan, 2, 233–243. https://doi.org/10.21831/cp.v36i2.11511
  12. Garfield, E. (1998). Long-term vs. short-term journal impact: does it matter? The Physiologist, 41(3), 113–115. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9652169
  13. Glänzel, W. (2006). On the opportunities and limitations of the H-index 1. Science Focus, 1(1), 10–11.
  14. Grifell-Tatje, & Lovell, C. A. K. (1995). A note on the Malmquist productivity index. Economics Letters, 47, 169–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-1765(94)00497-P
  15. Harzing, A.-W., & Van Der Wal, R. (2009). A Google Scholar H-Index for Journals: An Alternative Metric to Measure Journal Impact in Economics & Business. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(1), 41–46. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20953
  16. Ji, Y.-B., & Lee, C. (2010). Data envelopment analysis. The Stata Journal, 10(2), 267–280. https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.152313
  17. Kumar, A. (2018). Is “Impact” the “Factor” that matters...? (Part I). In Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology (Vol. 22, Issue 2, pp. 95–96). Medknow Publications. https://doi.org/10.4103/jisp.jisp_195_18
  18. Lam, K. F. (2015). In the determination of the most efficient decision making unit in data envelopment analysis. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 79, 76–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2014.10.027
  19. Lee, H., & Shin, J. (2014). Measuring journal performance for multidisciplinary research: An efficiency perspective. Journal of Informetrics, 8(1), 77–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2013.10.004
  20. Miemczyk, J., Johnsen., & Macquet, M. (2012). Sustainable purchasing and supply management: a structured literature review of definitions and measures at the dyad, chain and network levels. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 17(5), 478–496. https://doi.org/10.1108/13598541211258564
  21. Petridis, K., Malesios, C., Arabatzis, G., & Thanassoulis, E. (2013). Efficiency analysis of forestry journals: Suggestions for improving journals’ quality. Journal of Informetrics, 7(2), 505–521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2013.02.002
  22. Ramírez-Valdivia, M., Maturana, S., Mendoza-Alonzo, J., & Bustos, J. (2015). Measuring the efficiency of chilean primary healthcare centres. International Journal of Engineering Business Management, 7. https://doi.org/10.5772/60839
  23. Rohanda. (2019). Analisis Bibliometrika Tingkat Kolaborasi, Produktivitas Penulis, Serta Profil Artikel Jurnal Kajian Informasi &. PUSTABIBLIA: Journal of Library and Information Science, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.18326/pustabiblia.v3i1.1-15
  24. Rosenthal, E. C., & Weiss, H. J. (2017a). A data envelopment analysis approach for ranking journals. Omega, 70, 135–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2016.09.006
  25. Rosenthal, E. C., & Weiss, H. J. (2017b). A data envelopment analysis approach for ranking journals. Omega (United Kingdom), 70, 135–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2016.09.006
  26. Saputra, A. (2020). Pemanfaatan Science and Technology Index (SINTA) untuk Publikasi Karya Ilmiah dan Pencarian Jurnal Nasional Terakreditasi. Media Pustakawan, 27 (1). https://doi.org/10.37014/medpus.v27i1.674
  27. Suryaningsum, S., Purwanto, S. H., Kusumastutik, B., & Tanjung, R. W. (2020). Strategi Universitas Meraih Nilai Tinggi Untuk Jurnal Terakreditasi Dalam SINTA. 4(1), 73–79. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.30595/jssh.v4i1.6144
  28. Teodorović, D., & Nikolić, M. (2021). Measuring scientific output of researchers by t-index and Data Envelopment Analysis. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2107.05376
  29. Tone, K., & Tsutsui, M. (2009). Network DEA: A slacks-based measure approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 197(1), 243–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2008.05.027
  30. Xu, T., You, J., Li, H., & Shao, L. (2020). Energy Efficiency Evaluation Based on Data Envelopment Analysis: A Literature Review. Energies, 13(14). https://doi.org/10.3390/en13143548

Full Text:
Article Info
Submitted: 2023-08-26
Published: 2024-03-15
Section: Articles
Article Statistics: