I completely agree with william Haynes. How much Impact factor you gain out of your research paper also matters a lot.
@Nehal: But a lot of people do an excellent job but their research is not "popular" and then they can't publish in journals with a high impact factor!
dear Nadine I meant case reports are not considered while reviewing a researchers CV: We normally stress on original papers and reviews: so I wanted to know where editorials stand
@Tahir: Good thought but who wants to evaluate this??? Cheers, Nadine
Publication with peer reviewed journals and high impact is the basic criterion for judging any CV. However, sometimes very nice papers are also published in low impact journals. Thus one might see the quality of subject here. The editorial is expected from an expert of the field, as most of the journals do. It also stands as a technical or review. It is highly unexpected and will be seldom considered as a paper if editorial is written by some students, or unqualified persons. Thus editorial written by the author in his expertise is a jewell in crown. As there are several fake journals present in Asian continent, editorial in those journals is a question.
Dear William iam ramana and not ravana: Indeed ramana was named after God Rama and ravana is considered evil: Please forgive me but I meant in a very lighter vein: your answer I appreciate but recently I have applied for a fellowship that considers letters on par with originals
I would like to state again that it totally depends on the subject of editorial and your expertise. if your expertise is matching with editorial and the journal is a good impact peer review, it will be considered like a technical or review paper.
Dear researchers here i would like to put up my perspective: these are the days where there are numerous journals: It was history where only senior faculty/researchers used become editorial board members: now i see many young researchers are enrolling themselves as editorial board members: I hope you know that new publishers have made it open in inviting researchers/faculty to become editorial board members: My self i have been on the board after i was invited and asked to submit my CV and later being appointed on editorial board: I am now on board of 4 Journals that are based in US/UK. I have published 5 editorials till now among my >25 publications: whats your take: I personally feel selection to editorial board must be prior CV scrutiny and such editorial board members if publish editorials to be credited on par with reviews/ i must say editorial to be credited more than review as editorials also bring in many expert opinions of seniors after their long experiences
I agree the views of Birendra Singh. However, citations are the best credit to a paper rather than impact factor of the journal. As some body said very good papers appears/appeared in low impact journals. In other words, passionate researchers doesnt need to care even about impact/citations. For somebody research is a profession/hobby/livelihood/passion. It depends on which category we are in.
I think if one have a quality research then it can be easily published into a high impact. So it is natural that if one have a quality work, he/she will never publish it in a low impact! Its unlikely that a person will publish its quality research in a low impact journal. e.g. several high impact journals has multiple referee system and the manuscripts are revised by >4-5 reviewers. On the other hand low impacts journals have 2 reviewer system. So you can easily imagine 2 reviewer and 4-5 reviewers comments for a manuscript. I will insist to publish a quality work in high impact so it will be recognised by broad readers.
Can any one come up with some concrete evidence on the priority list: my list will be 1) original research; 2) editorial/opinon/perspective/commentary; 3)review; 4) letters/correspondence
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Methodology
- Research Methodology
- Research Papers