Does Criticisms Overcome the Praises of Journal Impact Factor?
Masood Fooladi, Hadi Salehi, Melor Md Yunus, Maryam Farhadi, Arezoo, Aghaei Chadegani, Hadi Farhadi, Nader Ale Ebrahim
TL;DR
This paper discusses the criticisms of the journal impact factor (IF), highlighting its drawbacks and the need for new journal ranking methods beyond IF to improve scientific publishing quality.
Contribution
It emphasizes the limitations of IF and advocates for developing alternative journal ranking techniques to address its criticisms.
Findings
IF attracts more attention than other metrics
Extensive use of IF may harm scientific quality
Need for new journal ranking methods
Abstract
Journal impact factor (IF) as a gauge of influence and impact of a particular journal comparing with other journals in the same area of research, reports the mean number of citations to the published articles in particular journal. Although, IF attracts more attention and being used more frequently than other measures, it has been subjected to criticisms, which overcome the advantages of IF. Critically, extensive use of IF may result in destroying editorial and researchers behaviour, which could compromise the quality of scientific articles. Therefore, it is the time of the timeliness and importance of a new invention of journal ranking techniques beyond the journal impact factor.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
Topicsscientometrics and bibliometrics research