Dear Claire Su-Yeon Park:

I think that article published in high Impact Factor journal will get more citations than in low impact factor journal.

Regards

I don't think it is a case of one being more appreciated than the other, I think they are of equal merit and value. I am not even sure (perhaps I am naïve) that impact factors are relevant...in my field perhaps. When reviewing literature I am more interested in the quality of the writing or construction of the method than what journal the paper comes from. Although, having said that, I do value the publisher of the journal - there are some disreputable publishers who spurn out junk journals and publications.

Ross E Hendy Sincerely thank you for your comment. As a scholar, I believe that academic discussion articles such as Editorial, Perspective, and Sounding Board are also important. Those articles help us stop for a while and address where we are, where we are going, and what we should do in order to meet a rapidly changing research trend. But I personally feel that scholars do not appreciate those articles as much as original articles despite those articles are being published after going through a rigorous peer review. How about your field (or country)?

Yes, some scholars might be more inclined not to value original articles more than the more subjective discussion articles. But, I don' think that discussions or editorial papers have any less rigour. Both are important.

The main thing is the quality of either article. But always try for HI journals imo :)

Andrew Paul McKenzie Pegman Thanks a million for your advice. Yes, I will keep it in mind!

Usman Atique

By the way, I have had a different experience than I expected. For example, one of my papers is an original paper to introduce a new stat method (intraindividual variability, IVI) to the nurse science community.

Article Growth Trajectories and Detrended Intraindividual Variabilit...

Due to the nature of the paper, it has been published in a relatively low profile journal. The problem is that the innovative paper has been much less read and cited, compared to my editorials published in a top journal in my research area: Article Thinking 'Outside the Box'

I can tell you that both of them have a high quality in scholarly merits.

Thus, I think that Andrew Paul McKenzie Pegman's advice makes sense in reality.

I think academicians should look for bonafide work, then should look for the type of journal.

Thank you for your opinion, Dr. B. Dr. Ravishankar

Depends on the number of citations

Dr. Nagendra Nath Das, would you mind if I ask a favor of you to explain me "Q1 to Q3 journals"? Perhpas, do you mean the percentle of the journals by JIF (journal impact factor)?

I am with scientific contributions in journals with high impact factors, Because these contributions will be in front of professional perspectives that can give real assessment by specialists.

Hope more and lasting success for you dear colleague

Ah, you meant a journal ranking! If so, does your advice mean that it would be better for me to publish my articles in Q1 to Q3 regardless of a type of articles such as an opinion piece or original paper?

Firas Saadallah, Salam Jassim Hmood , Dr. Nagendra Nath Das, sincerely thank you for all of your advice!

Answer from the hero in Leo Szilard’s 1948 story “The Mark Gable Foundation” when asked by a wealthy entrepreneur who believes that science has progressed too quickly, what he should do to retard this progress: “You could set up a foundation with an annual endowment of thirty million dollars. Research workers in need of funds could apply for grants, if they could make a convincing case. Have ten committees, each composed of twelve scientists, appointed to pass on these applications. Take the most active scientists out of the laboratory and make them members of these committees. ...First of all, the best scientists would be removed from their laboratories and kept busy on committees passing on applications for funds. Secondly the scientific workers in need of funds would concentrate on problems which were considered promising and were pretty certain to lead to publishable results. ...By going after the obvious, pretty soon science would dry out. Science would become something like a parlor game. ...There would be fashions. Those who followed the fashions would get grants. Those who wouldn’t would not.”

Dear Claire Su-Yeon Park:

I think that article published in high Impact Factor journal will get more citations than in low impact factor journal.

Regards

Certainly Opinion piece in a high impact factor journal, because it will gain more citations.

Regards

Ammar A. Oglat, Alaa Hani Al-Charrakh, Maysa Salih Al-Shukri, thank you all for your valuable comments. All of participants in this discussion suggests that (1) there are no significant differences between opinion piece and original research in terms of scholarly merits/excellence and (2) publications in a high impact journal is more recommended because it increases the possibility of getting more citations, leading to give more impact on the science community. Thank you all!

If you have one manuscript of scientific work in an original article format , than submit it for a low impact journal and make available in this professional portal here. Please, dont spoil / degrade it transforming to an opinion article in a high impact journal. As a scientific weigh, former is outweigh the latter. You can reserve opinion type articles / reviews / letter to the editor type work for high impact journal. I would suggest to you, do both, if you can.

For the sake of citation purposes only , you may go for a high impact journal, that would allow you get the known in your scientific filed.

BW,

Dr. Emre Pakdemirli, thank you so much for your advice. I will keep it in mind.

It depended on the difference in impact factor. I will prefer a peer reviewed article in a 2.0 impact factor journal than opinion piece in the 4.5 IF journal. I have done both a large number of times, so I am basing it on my on experience.

Dr. Shah, thanks a million for sharing your experience with me. My work represents a new perspective, which differs from the mainstream research trend; thus, it anticipates a paradigm shift in a way of thinking. I have felt a strong resistance to the innovation, caused by a conformity pressure, for that reason. I have thus started publishing various opinion pieces as a mean of informing my works to the science community and reducing the innovation resistance since then. I come to realization that such opinion pieces are never easy (easier) to be published in a highly-reputed journal. Those articles must also go through a rigorous peer review before publication. I thus think that such opinion articles should also be appreciated as much as original articles. The type and purpose of articles are just different from each other.