As part of completing doctoral studies I signed up for a single hour of 700-level credit, where the preparation of two first author submissions was the goal. 3 first three author papers were the actual outcome. Impact factors of the journals are 1.98, 2.28, and 5.92. Does this accomplishment seem like meeting, exceeding, or failing to complete the credit?
Well, it depends on the quality of the papers. Of course, we cannot measure that only based on IF (even if this is mainstream these days). And, in addition, the IF is relative to a research area. I mean, an IF of 2.28 may seem very high for a certain discipline and be very low for another different one.
In any case, you were asked for 2 and gave them 3. If no further requirements were asked, then it is obviuos that you completed your task.
Andrew Paul McKenzie Pegman and Antonio M. Oller-Marcén , thank you for your comments.
The topic of IF differences is interesting (confounded by pay for journals, different peer review processes, and relationships with journal leadership). The lowest IF in this list belongs to the journal from my profession's professional organization. Participating in the professional community is looked upon very highly.
Some researchers have communicated that primarily, a researcher must be able to first author a publication, then, having your work cited by others is a second indicator of quality. I don't remember the source I reviewed recently but basically I came across information suggesting that up to 50% of published literature isn't cited. I am surprised if that is true.
Personally, I think access to and quality of support resources is a critically important consideration (which would be nearly impossible to gauge). I also like what one mentor indicated to me, i.e. a publication should have at least one genuine & interesting new result, idea/thought, analysis, etc. That thought could significantly decouple IF from content.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Education
- Higher Education