Does it mean that the journals without an impact factor are not good in terms of quality and scientific content? Or it is just a measure of a big publisher tagged with the particular journal. What about the journals which calculate their own impact factors (other than Journal Citation Reports and Thomson Reuters)?
Does a high or low impact factor can be considered a criterion to judge the scientific potential of a candidate?
Normally seen that journals in the herbal technology and phytochemistry and pharmacological side have a comparably very low impact factor as compared to journals dealing with pharmaceutics and biotechnology and NDDS. So is it correct to treat this disciplines on a similar platform when taking an interview of a candidate for a job concerning pharmacy (as all this disciplines are a part of pharmacy only)?? Will this not be an injustice with the potential candidate in his expertise field??