This study aims to explore the relationship between the formal prestige of journals and the actual impact of articles, investigating whether a high Journal Impact Factor (JIF) necessarily implies greater article visibility, or if a distributional gap exists between journal-level prestige and article-level visibility. The present research is an applied study conducted through a descriptive-analytical method with a citation analysis approach. Data were extracted from the Web of Science database for the period 2009–2018. The research population includes all articles from 13 selected journals in the field of Information Science and Library Science, chosen based on their thematic proximity to Scientometrics and their continuity of publication. The Spearman rank correlation test was utilized to examine the statistical relationship between the impact factor and the uncitedness rate. The average uncitedness rate in the studied journals was approximately 26%, ranging from 4.8% to 72.3%. Results of the Spearman test indicate a strong inverse relationship between the impact factor and the uncitedness rate at the macro level; however, detailed analyses showed that this relationship is non-linear and significant exceptions exist in certain journals. During the ten-year period under study, the uncitedness rate decreased from 31% in 2009 to 23% in 2018, yet heterogeneity in citation distribution has persisted. The analysis of document types revealed that only review articles and biographical items have a significant negative relationship with uncitedness, while other document types do not have a significant effect. The research findings indicate that the impact factor, as an average-based index at the journal level, cannot serve as a definitive guarantee for article visibility at the micro level. Even in journals with high impact factors, the phenomenon of uncitedness exists perceptibly; a fact that points to the multifaceted nature of the concept of impact and the existence of a gap between a journal’s official prestige and the attraction of scientific attention at the article level. This study emphasizes the necessity of transitioning from purely journal-centered evaluations toward more diverse metrics based on the actual performance of articles.