Academic institutions are using citation index, h-index, publications in high impact factor journals etc. as indicators of a scientist's success and popularity of his/her research for promotions, awards, funds etc. Some researchers feel that these indexes are over-emphasized. While they are useful indicators, over dependence on them for promoting or awarding a scientist is not fair. What is your opinion?
Actually, the opposite is true, at least if you use Thomson Reuters' IF. The data are quite unequivocal that the most unreliable science is published in the top journals. So if you want to use metrics to increase your chances of identifying a scientist whose science can be relied upon, don't pick one with articles in big name journals.
it's OK. research performance is only one aspect of a scientist, so any measurement or ranking should regard other aspects based on it's goal. nowadays research performance is focused on publication and citation indicators but the user of this indicators should use them smartly. in other hand, there is a lot of works to improve them and using other existing evidence related to. one of these new methods is Altmetrics.
Actually, the opposite is true, at least if you use Thomson Reuters' IF. The data are quite unequivocal that the most unreliable science is published in the top journals. So if you want to use metrics to increase your chances of identifying a scientist whose science can be relied upon, don't pick one with articles in big name journals.
My dear friend, I will be free to bring some good answers of the following threads and some articles about the issue! I do think that beside citation index, discoveries, inventions and rationalizations , successful applications of research result should be taken into account! The visibility of published article is an important issue in this regard!
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Which_is_important_for_a_researcher-impact_factor_citation_index_or_h_index
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Do_you_agree_that_assessment_of_scientific_productivity_should_be_based_on_the_amount_of_discoveries_inventions_and_rationalizations
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Does_publishing_in_high_impacted_journals_improve_the_visibility_of_a_researcher/1
https://www.researchgate.net/post/How_do_you_increase_the_visibility_of_published_article
Chapter Enhancing Research Visibility and Improving Citations‖
Dear all
Thank you very much for your valuable opinions.
Best wishes and good luck.
I agree with Rajeswara Rao's views that the citation indexes may be over-emphasized . RG has publication views & downloads , in addition to citations , to highlight how an article is viewed . This gives the authors clarity how their work is perceived , as many of them may not publish articles , but use them in their practice . Many use articles of International journals for citation & do not use local indexed journals , even if they are relevant . It is very difficult to assess a scientist's success using the present yardsticks .
It is important for a researcher to ensure for a paper to achieve a maximum impact! Link follows! Does sharing data lead to more citations? Many good discussions. 40+ ways to add value to your journal article - second link!
http://www.elsevier.com/authors-update/story/publishing-tips/ensuring-your-paper-achieves-maximum-impact
http://www.elsevier.com/authors-update/story/innovation-in-publishing/40-ways-to-add-value-to-your-journal-article
No it is just an index. Not a measurement of greatness and knowledge.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Publications