If we consider this article here: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6154/60.full
Then the system of peer review seems to be suspect, not only for open access journals, but also for the "closed" journals. This study shows that the peer review
accepted an article with built in errors for publication for almost of half of the journals under investigation. Explanations could be that there are too many articles to be reviewed and to little number of reviewers. So the errors were not detected.
On the other side the high impact factors of natural science journals are a discrimination of human science articles, which also appear in peer reviewed journals.
Peter - at the end of the day - we have a far from 'fool-proof' system in play. That equates to a combinations of factors - some which heavily influence some journals far more than others. These equate to issues such as editors and publishers that are IF-focused above all other considerations I.e quantity over quality, IF repositories I.e ISI that try to force the 'market' and create an illusion that one system is better than another, and authors that 'fall in all the traps' and subscribe to these 'flawed' concepts.
Peter - at the end of the day - we have a far from 'fool-proof' system in play. That equates to a combinations of factors - some which heavily influence some journals far more than others. These equate to issues such as editors and publishers that are IF-focused above all other considerations I.e quantity over quality, IF repositories I.e ISI that try to force the 'market' and create an illusion that one system is better than another, and authors that 'fall in all the traps' and subscribe to these 'flawed' concepts.
My positioning: Science is not a show business. Scientists must solve human problems
BUT
we can not be naive...
Some sciences are completely unknown to people in some countries. Why? Political and economic interests.
There is no doubt that the sciences with critical thinking like human sciences can be discriminate.
The algorithms are not unbiased.
People write logic with intent and are paid for it.
In some places, the impact factor is considered sacred; it is not only fool-proof but also stainless & above criticism. The managers in such places reached the top positions they dreamt of and they ,afterwards, sought any excuse to put hurdles in front of those who look forward to promotion. When (IF) was made, those managers shouted "Eureka" like Archimedes, adopted it at once, and delayed as many scholars as they could from promotion( which itself has tailored regulations which benefit X & deny Y).
Impact Factor receiving depends on reputation of publishers and editors of journals, can be modulated or managed at times, many journals receives IF and then suddenly loose IF in a day? But in broad senses reputed journals always have good IF. And a new journal if publishes good papers will have to wait for 5-6 years or may be more to receive IF and to run without IF for 5-6 years is a very hard process to get good papers
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Academic Journals