Major indexing service rejects appeals by two suppressed journals

From The Embassy of Good Science
Revision as of 13:24, 21 June 2021 by 0000-0002-1723-7560 (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{Resource |Resource Type=Cases |Title=Major indexing service rejects appeals by two suppressed journals |Is About=In this factual case study, two academic journals were suppr...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Cases

Major indexing service rejects appeals by two suppressed journals

What is this about?

In this factual case study, two academic journals were suppressed in Journal Citation Reports (JCR) because they allegedly have excessively self-cited in order to raise their impact factor.

Why is this important?

This is an interesting case for several reasons. Firstly, it shows that allegations of misconduct are not restricted to individual researchers and their institutes but also to publishers/editors of journals, although such cases are less frequently encountered.

Secondly, the specific allegations may appear more difficult to investigate and prove as misconduct. One of the journals maintain that there was no intention to inflate the impact factor and any excessive self-citation was due to a 'niche' area where no many other journals publish on the topic.

The case is also interesting and can stimulate discussions as to what is a good balance between broad and specialized referencing.

For whom is this important?

Other information

When
Good Practices & Misconduct
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.
5.1.6