Abstract Purpose This work aims to consider the role and some of the 42-year history of the discipline impact factor (DIF) in evaluation of serial publications. Also, the original “symmetric” indicator called the “discipline susceptibility factor” is to be presented. Design/methodology/approach In accordance with the purpose of the work, the methods are analytical interpretation of the scientific literature related to this problem as well as speculative explanations. The information base of the research is bibliometric publications dealing with impact, impact factor, discipline impact factor, and discipline susceptibility factor. Findings Examples of the DIF application and modification of the indicator are given. It is shown why research and university libraries need to use the DIF to evaluate serials in conditions of scarce funding for subscription to serial publications, even if open access is available. The role of the DIF for evaluating journals by authors of scientific papers when choosing a good and right journal for submitting a paper is also briefly discussed. An original indicator “symmetrical” to the DIF (the “discipline susceptibility factor”) and its differences from the DIF in terms of content and purpose of evaluation are also briefly presented. Research limitations The selection of publications for the information base of the research did not include those in which the DIF was only mentioned, used partially or not for its original purpose. Restrictions on the length of the article to be submitted in this special issue of the JDIS also caused exclusion even a number of completely relevant publications. Consideration of the DIF is not placed in the context of describing other derivatives from the Garfield impact factor. Practical implications An underrated bibliometric indicator, viz. the discipline impact factor is being promoted for the practical application. An original indicator “symmetrical” to DIF has been proposed in order of searching serial publications representing the external research fields that might fit for potential applications of the results of scientific activities obtained within the framework of the specific research field represented by the cited specialized journals. Both can be useful in research and university libraries in their endeavors to improve scientific information services. Also, both can be used for evaluating journals by authors of scientific papers when choosing a journal to submit a paper. Originality/value The article substantiates the need to evaluate scientific serial publications in library activities—even in conditions of access to huge and convenient databases (subscription packages) and open access to a large number of serial publications. It gives a mini-survey of the history of one of the methods of such evaluation, and offers an original method for evaluating scientific serial publications.

中文翻译：

---

学科影响因素：它的一些历史，作者在其应用中的一些经历，其使用的持续原因以及……下一个

摘要目的这项工作旨在考虑学科影响因子（DIF）在连续出版物评估中的作用和42年的历史。同样，将提出原始的“对称”指标，称为“学科敏感性因子”。设计/方法/方法根据工作的目的，方法是与该问题有关的科学文献的分析解释以及推测性解释。该研究的信息基础是涉及影响，影响因子，学科影响因子和学科敏感性因子的文献计量出版物。结果给出了DIF应用和指标修改的示例。它显示了为什么研究和大学图书馆需要使用DIF在缺乏资金来订阅连续出版物的情况下评估连续出版物，即使可以使用开放获取。还简要讨论了DIF在选择好的和正确的期刊提交论文时对科学论文作者评估期刊的作用。还简要介绍了与DIF“对称”的原始指标（“学科敏感性因子”）及其在内容和评估目的方面与DIF的差异。研究局限性研究的信息库出版物的选择不包括仅提及DIF，仅部分使用或不用于DIF的出版物。在本期JDIS上要提交的文章篇幅的限制也导致甚至许多完全相关的出版物也被排除在外。在描述来自加菲猫影响因子的其他导数时，并未考虑DIF。实际意义被低估的文献计量指标，即。学科影响因素正在推广以供实际应用。已经提出了与DIF“对称”的原始指标，以便搜索代表外部研究领域的系列出版物，这些出版物可能适合在所引用的专业期刊所代表的特定研究领域的框架内获得的科学活动结果的潜在应用。两者在研究和大学图书馆改善科学信息服务方面都可能有用。此外，既可以用于选择日志时提交的一篇论文的科学论文的作者评价期刊。原创性/价值这篇文章证实了在图书馆活动中评估科学连续出版物的必要性，即使是在访问庞大且方便的数据库（订阅软件包）和公开访问大量连续出版物的条件下。它提供了这种评估方法之一的历史的简要调查，并提供了评估科学系列出版物的原始方法。原创性/价值这篇文章证实了在图书馆活动中评估科学连续出版物的必要性，即使是在访问庞大且方便的数据库（订阅软件包）和公开访问大量连续出版物的条件下。它提供了这种评估方法之一的历史的简要调查，并提供了评估科学系列出版物的原始方法。原创性/价值这篇文章证实了在图书馆活动中评估科学连续出版物的必要性，即使是在访问庞大且方便的数据库（订阅软件包）和公开访问大量连续出版物的条件下。它提供了这种评估方法之一的历史的简要调查，并提供了评估科学系列出版物的原始方法。