Difference between revisions of "Resource:8be5a9b1-1c66-4659-b175-ca1e8df61047"
From The Embassy of Good Science
| (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
|Title=Implications of a Single Highly Cited Article on a Journal and Its Citation Indexes | |Title=Implications of a Single Highly Cited Article on a Journal and Its Citation Indexes | ||
|Is About=This article presents two factual cases of a substantial and very steep improvement in two journals’ impact factor (JIF): Case A demonstrates how the journal FOLIA PHONIATR LOGO, in an attempt to improve its JIF, published an editorial which cited a large number of its own previously published articles; as a result, the journal was revoked in the following year by the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI). In case B, the journal ACTA CRYSTALLOGR improved its overall impact factor by an astonishing 2,334% following the publication of a single very highly cited article. Because of the way that JIF is calculated, the journal’s high factor was retained for two years. However, in contrast to case A above, the journal in case B was not revoked. | |Is About=This article presents two factual cases of a substantial and very steep improvement in two journals’ impact factor (JIF): Case A demonstrates how the journal FOLIA PHONIATR LOGO, in an attempt to improve its JIF, published an editorial which cited a large number of its own previously published articles; as a result, the journal was revoked in the following year by the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI). In case B, the journal ACTA CRYSTALLOGR improved its overall impact factor by an astonishing 2,334% following the publication of a single very highly cited article. Because of the way that JIF is calculated, the journal’s high factor was retained for two years. However, in contrast to case A above, the journal in case B was not revoked. | ||
| − | |Important Because=Academic journals, similarly to academic institutions and individual researchers, strive for recognition, esteem and resources. This case is important because it provides an explanation of how, despite the similarities of these two incidents (in both case A & B, the journals dramatically improved their JIF as a result of a single published article), there were two very different outcomes (in case A, the journal was revoked for the following year, whilst in case B, there were no adverse consequences for the journal). To quote the paper’s stated importance of the case, these two incidents indicate the ‘possible flaws in the citation indexes and the review process’ (p.100-1) | + | |Important Because=Academic journals, similarly to academic institutions and individual researchers, strive for recognition, esteem and resources. This case is important because it provides an explanation of how, despite the similarities of these two incidents (in both case A & B, the journals dramatically improved their JIF as a result of a single published article), there were two very different outcomes (in case A, the journal was revoked for the following year, whilst in case B, there were no adverse consequences for the journal). To quote the paper’s stated importance of the case, these two incidents indicate the ‘possible flaws in the citation indexes and the review process’ (p.100-1)<ref>Foo JY. Implications of a single highly cited article on a journal and its citation indexes: a tale of two journals. Account Res. 2013;20(2):93-106. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2013.767124. PMID: 23432771</ref>. |
| − | The paper discusses individuals’ and institutions’ motivations for publishing but also the dangers of the pressures to publish. Furthermore, it considers the value, but also the flaws, of the citation index systems. Finally, it provides some examples of good editorial practices and recommendations for responding to such flaws. | + | The paper discusses individuals’ and institutions’ motivations for publishing but also the dangers of the pressures to publish. Furthermore, it considers the value, but also the flaws, of the citation index systems. Finally, it provides some examples of good editorial practices and recommendations for responding to such flaws. |
| − | ---- | + | ----<br /> |
| − | |Important For=Researchers | + | ----<br /> |
| + | |Important For=Researchers; Editors; Journal editors | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Link | {{Link | ||
Latest revision as of 17:44, 26 October 2020
ResourcesCases
Implications of a Single Highly Cited Article on a Journal and Its Citation Indexes
What is this about?
This article presents two factual cases of a substantial and very steep improvement in two journals’ impact factor (JIF): Case A demonstrates how the journal FOLIA PHONIATR LOGO, in an attempt to improve its JIF, published an editorial which cited a large number of its own previously published articles; as a result, the journal was revoked in the following year by the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI). In case B, the journal ACTA CRYSTALLOGR improved its overall impact factor by an astonishing 2,334% following the publication of a single very highly cited article. Because of the way that JIF is calculated, the journal’s high factor was retained for two years. However, in contrast to case A above, the journal in case B was not revoked.
Why is this important?
Academic journals, similarly to academic institutions and individual researchers, strive for recognition, esteem and resources. This case is important because it provides an explanation of how, despite the similarities of these two incidents (in both case A & B, the journals dramatically improved their JIF as a result of a single published article), there were two very different outcomes (in case A, the journal was revoked for the following year, whilst in case B, there were no adverse consequences for the journal). To quote the paper’s stated importance of the case, these two incidents indicate the ‘possible flaws in the citation indexes and the review process’ (p.100-1)[1].
The paper discusses individuals’ and institutions’ motivations for publishing but also the dangers of the pressures to publish. Furthermore, it considers the value, but also the flaws, of the citation index systems. Finally, it provides some examples of good editorial practices and recommendations for responding to such flaws.
For whom is this important?
Other information
When
Where
Virtues & Values
Good Practices & Misconduct
Research Area
- ↑ Foo JY. Implications of a single highly cited article on a journal and its citation indexes: a tale of two journals. Account Res. 2013;20(2):93-106. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2013.767124. PMID: 23432771
