Journal of Sports Sciences Impact Factor & Information

Publisher: British Association of Sports Sciences; International Society for Advancement of Kinanthropometry, Taylor & Francis

Journal description

The Journal of Sports Sciences publishes articles of a high standard on various aspects of the sports sciences covering a number of disciplinary bases, including anatomy, biochemistry, biomechanics, psychology, sociology, as well as ergonomics, kinanthropometry and other interdisciplinary perspectives. In addition to reports of research, review articles and book reviews are published. The emphasis of the Journal is on the human sciences, broadly defined, applied to sport and exercise. Besides experimental work in human responses to exercise, the subjects covered will include technologies such as the design of sports equipment and playing facilities, research in training, selection, performance prediction or modification, and stress reduction or manifestation. Manuscripts dealing with original investigations of exercise, validation of technological innovations in sport or comprehensive reviews of topics relevant to the scientific study of sport will be considered for publication. The Journal presents research findings in the growing area of exercise and sports sciences to an international audience. The readership for this journal is varied and ranges from academic research workers to professionals in recreation, sports coaching and training.

Current impact factor: 2.25

Impact Factor Rankings

2015 Impact Factor Available summer 2016
2014 Impact Factor 2.246
2013 Impact Factor 2.095
2012 Impact Factor 2.082
2011 Impact Factor 1.931
2010 Impact Factor 1.87
2009 Impact Factor 1.619
2008 Impact Factor 1.625
2007 Impact Factor 1.441
2006 Impact Factor 1.797
2005 Impact Factor 1.697
2004 Impact Factor 0.89
2003 Impact Factor 0.741
2002 Impact Factor 1.082
2001 Impact Factor 0.928
2000 Impact Factor 1.306
1999 Impact Factor 1.13
1998 Impact Factor 0.675

Impact factor over time

Impact factor

Additional details

5-year impact 3.00
Cited half-life 7.60
Immediacy index 0.33
Eigenfactor 0.01
Article influence 0.72
Website Journal of Sports Sciences website
Other titles Journal of sports sciences (Online)
ISSN 0264-0414
OCLC 49818756
Material type Document, Periodical, Internet resource
Document type Internet Resource, Computer File, Journal / Magazine / Newspaper

Publisher details

Taylor & Francis

  • Pre-print
    • Author can archive a pre-print version
  • Post-print
    • Author can archive a post-print version
  • Conditions
    • Some individual journals may have policies prohibiting pre-print archiving
    • On author's personal website or departmental website immediately
    • On institutional repository or subject-based repository after a 18 months embargo
    • Publisher's version/PDF cannot be used
    • On a non-profit server
    • Published source must be acknowledged
    • Must link to publisher version
    • Set statements to accompany deposits (see policy)
    • The publisher will deposit in on behalf of authors to a designated institutional repository including PubMed Central, where a deposit agreement exists with the repository
    • SSH: Social Science and Humanities
    • Publisher last contacted on 25/03/2014
    • This policy is an exception to the default policies of 'Taylor & Francis'
  • Classification

Publications in this journal

  • Journal of Sports Sciences 11/2015; DOI:10.1080/02640414.2015.1105378

  • Journal of Sports Sciences 10/2015; 33(20):1-1. DOI:10.1080/02640414.2015.1106806
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This qualitative study presents the view that coaching practice places demands on the coach's adaptability and flexibility. These requirements for being adaptive and flexible are met through a careful process of professional judgement and decision-making based on context-appropriate bodies of knowledge. Adventure sports coaches were selected for study on the basis that adventure sports create a hyper-dynamic environment in which these features can be examined. Thematic analysis revealed that coaches were generally well informed and practised with respect to the technical aspects of their sporting disciplines. Less positively, however, they often relied on ad hoc contextualisation of generalised theories of coaching practice to respond to the hyper-dynamic environments encountered in adventure sports. We propose that coaching practice reflects the demands of the environment, individual learning needs of the students and the task at hand. Together, these factors outwardly resemble a constraints-led approach but, we suggest, actually reflect manipulation of these parameters from a cognitive rather than an ecological perspective. This process is facilitated by a refined judgement and decision-making process, sophisticated epistemology and an explicit interaction of coaching components.
    Journal of Sports Sciences 10/2015; DOI:10.1080/02640414.2015.1105379
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Rural Australians have a higher likelihood of chronic disease than urban Australians, particularly male farmers. Chronic disease has been associated with occupational sedentary time. The aim was to validate the self-report of sedentary time in men in contrasting rural occupations. Farmers (n = 29) and office workers (n = 28), age 30-65 years, were recruited from the Riverland region of South Australia. Daily sedentary time and number of breaks in sedentary time were self-reported and measured objectively using body-worn inclinometers. Correlational analyses were conducted between self-reported and objectively measured variables, separately by occupation. There was a significant correlation between self-reported and objectively measured sedentary time in the whole sample (r = 0.44, P = 0.001). The correlation among office workers was significant (r = 0.57, P = 0.003) but not among farmers (r = 0.08, P = 0.68). There were no significant correlations between self-reported and measured number of breaks in sedentary time, for the whole sample (rho = -0.03, P = 0.83), office workers (rho = 0.17, P = 0.39) and farmers (rho = -0.22, P = 0.25). In conclusion, the validity of self-report of sedentary behaviours by farmers was poor. Further research is needed to develop better performing self-report instruments or more accessible objective measures of sedentary behaviour in this population.
    Journal of Sports Sciences 10/2015; DOI:10.1080/02640414.2015.1094185
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study examined the effect of high (HPBPT) and low percentage ball possession (LPBPT) on physical and technical indicators during 2014 FIFA World Cup matches. This would enable a regression model to be constructed to further understand the impact of different ball possession (BP) strategies on match performance. Data were collected from 346 international soccer players using a multiple-camera computerised tracking system. Although players in HPBPT covered lower distances (P < 0.01) in total and at low speed compared to LPBPT this produced a trivial Effect Size (ES). However, they covered similar distances (P > 0.05) at medium and high speeds. Players in LPBPT covered more distance without ball possession but less with ball possession than HPBPT (P < 0.01; ES large). All positions in LPBPT spent less time in the opposing half and attacking third than the players in HPBPT (P < 0.01; ES small-moderate), but all positions in HPBPT completed more short and medium passes than LPBPT (P < 0.01; ES moderate). Players in HPBPT produced more solo runs into the attacking third and penalty area than LPBPT (P < 0.05, ES small). The equation to predict BP from physical and technical indicators highlighted the importance of distances covered (total, with and without ball possession), time spent in the attacking third and successful short passes during matches. In practical terms, high or low BP does not influence the activity patterns of international matches although HPBPT spend more time in offensive areas of the pitch.
    Journal of Sports Sciences 10/2015;
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Running economy is a reflection of the amount of inspired oxygen required to maintain a given velocity and is considered a determining factor for running performance. Athletic footwear has been advocated as a mechanism by which running economy can be enhanced. New commercially available footwear has been developed in order to increase energy return, although their efficacy has not been investigated. This study aimed to examine the effects of energy return footwear on running economy in relation to conventional running shoes. Twelve male runners completed 6-min steady-state runs in conventional and energy return footwear. Overall, oxygen consumption (VO2), heart rate, respiratory exchange ratio, shoe comfort and rating of perceived exertion were assessed. Moreover, participants subjectively indicated which shoe condition they preferred for running. Differences in shoe comfort and physiological parameters were examined using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests, whilst shoe preferences were tested using a chi-square analysis. The results showed that VO2 and respiratory exchange ratio were significantly lower, and shoe comfort was significantly greater, in the energy return footwear. Given the relationship between running economy and running performance, these observations indicate that the energy return footwear may be associated with enhanced running performance in comparison to conventional shoes.
    Journal of Sports Sciences 09/2015; DOI:10.1080/02640414.2015.1088961