Please give your thoughts and constructive feedback on my analysis. I define Scientific Impact Factor (SIF) = (Average Citations in Yth year for publications in Y-1 and Y-2 years)/(Average journal impact factor for publications in Y-1 and Y-2 years). I present a comparison of 10 scientists working across different fields to illustrate the power of this metric.
Download the working paper from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317209612_A_simple_index_to_benchmark_the_research_impact_of_scientists_across_disciplines_and_different_fields_of_research
Working Paper A simple index to benchmark the research impact of scientist...
Dear Prof. Linga,
This is a nice method as it factors the citations, number of publications and JIF of Researchers. However, i believe the issue of JIF discrimination across difference fields is still not completely normalized in the new equation (method). I suggest replacing the JIF with the each journal Quartile Scores (Q1-Q4) will the good as the Q-scores of journals is not solely dependent on their IF.
@Cornelius Bavoh, good point, the purpose was to see if SIF can normalise to a good extent and it seems to do that for the data shown in the working paper.. the problem with using Q1-Q4 is that many journals have multiple specialisations or fields that they are assigned to, so this makes it tedious or not easy to calculate! Currently, JIF is a single value assigned to a journal, hence, SIF is a bit easy and simple to estimate. I have expanded the data to include 30+ scientist's data and you can see it is achieving what we set out to a large extent (see the linear trend line in black as a guidance!), the diamond points in the graph represent each scientist data. For more information about the calculation of SIF, refer to the working paper.
Dear Prof. Linga,
The idea of SIF is good and creative. But I think it inherits the disadvantages of the traditional Impact Factor.
"Critics point out that impact factors are calculated as an average for the total published output of a journal and that this information should not be used to gauge the importance of an individual research paper'' [in this case an individual scientist].
http://www.gcu.ac.uk/library/pilot/publication/impactfactors/advantagesanddisadvantages/
Dear Ali Akbar Khasseh, JIF seems to be the most sought out measure for the quality of the journal within a specialisation by many. In fact SIF now helps identify the tall claims of certain scientists who wish to proclaim that they publish in high JIF. SIF will place their work in context of the journal they have published. Like if SIF is less than one for a particular paper of an author, that means the impact of his/her work did not contribute to the JIF of the journal! SIF can be implemented at the article level as well.. there are always pros and cons with any metric, As is with any metric, SIF can be seen in conjunction with other related metrics.
Thank you for the answer.
It is recommended to submit your paper to one of the following journal. Undoubtedly, their peer review will improve your idea.
https://link.springer.com/journal/11192
https://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-informetrics
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Journal Impact Factor