I think yes, they sum-up the impact factors for the journal of each paper. But this is not a good measure.

I think a much better measure is to use the number of citations of your papers/the number of your published papers.

This is crazy at all, given the common practice in medicine publications where up too 100 authors "co-write" a single paper. In fact, a single person writes, declares 99 others as co-authors and all of these do the same, too. This means that this calculated individual impact factor, in many cases, cannot show more than how large ones network is.

By the way, this practice of co-authoring eventually led to the foundation of the committee for publication ethics COPE (http://publicationethics.org), which clearly defines when someone should be considered to be declared as a co-author. However, this hardly influenced the herein criticized practice of many supervisors, e.g., insisting that thy generally are listed as co-authors (luckily, I did not have this "problem" during my dissertation times).

i think if the idea of the research (the solution) came from the supervisor, and worked with his/her student until the job is done and written correctly, then the supervisor has the right to co-author the work.

i think personal impact factor needs to be changed, RG score is an attempt to overcome such limitation, but it depends on social network, those how vote for you and you vote for them, however you need to spend some time to promote your work.

Off topic ...

By the way, Ahmad (I somehow cannot write directly),

as I have recognized that you seem being interested in the Learning Culture survey. If you like, we could implementn the Learning Culture Survey in your university. I just would need a translation to the national language (which takes about 6 hours) and afterwards would implement it in the Online survey system. For the translation, quite often, bi-lingual phd-students were selected and assigned from the already supporting institutions. What ypou would need to do is inviting your students for participation (it would be best if the whole student population could internally be addressed since the experience shows that the respose-rate is between 2-5% and a higher number of participants from different faculties allow distinguished conclusions on faculty cultures).

In return, I would, of course, give you the results (including evaluation) and/or present them in your institution, e.g., in form of a guest lecture (given that the expenses for travel and accomodation are covered).

All my best,

Thomas

if it is only an online survey, I will make sure that at least 200 of my students will participate, for the travel expenses it is difficult to arrange as my university is some how has a poor budget, accommodation and food is guaranteed in my home, I have a big house.

To find out how much impact a particular article or author has had, by showing which other authors cited the work within their own papers.  The H-Index is one specific method utilizing citation analysis to determine an individuals impact.

Effet des facteurs de contingence individuelle universaliste et configuationnelle

Author Impact Factor: tracking the dynamics of individual ...

www.nature.com › scientific reports › articles

Dear Thomas Richter

There is no personal impact factor, instead there is h-index, which is calculated based on the number published articles and number of citations that the authors get.

Following link should be helpful to calculate personal impact factor

https://libguides.mssm.edu/individualimpactfactor

The term "Cumulative Impact Factor" (or cumulative impact index) has been used with different meanings by different authors.

One definition is that the cumulative impact factor for an individual author is simply the sum over all papers that the author has published of the impact factors of the journals that the papers were published in. e.g.

You've published 3 papers in Journal A that has impact factor 1.2. You've published 1 paper in journal B that has impact factor 1.9. You've published 2 papers in journal C that has impact factor 1.7.

Your CIF would then be

CIF=3*1.2+1*1.9+2*1.7=8.9

Like all bibliometrics, it's a very crude measure. You can get a high score on this measure by publishing a lot of research in journals that aren't very prestigious, or by publishing a very small amount in highly prestigious journals,

click and check for more details

https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/32722/what-is-cumulative-impact-index-of-a-journal#:~:text=One%20definition%20is%20that%20the,the%20papers%20were%20published%20in.&text=You've%20published%203%20papers,that%20has%20impact%20factor%201.2.

Article Measuring the impact factor of individual researchers in bio...

Article Author Impact Factor: tracking the dynamics of individual sc...

Thank you Kumardeep Chaudhary, this is useful

Kamran Sattar In that case, should we consider the impact factor of the year the paper was published? Or the very recent impact factor?

Swadhina Koley you have a genuinely interesting question here. I just have come across a simpler definition of 'personal impact factor(PIF)' ( link attached below), Definition: "Personal Impact Factor actually calculates the 'reach and references' of your publications and displays the average number of times that your personal writing appears as a reference in other works. Hence you may know your (PIF) by counting the number of citations of your work and dividing it by the total number of pieces published". Swadhina Koley In that case, I believe, the "year the paper published / recent " shall not be an issue. In other words, PIF has nothing to do with the Journal's past/present impact factor. https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/calculate-impact-factor

Kamran Sattar Thank you for clarifying. Can you please give some insight into the cumulative impact factor? While calculating that, should we consider the impact factor of the current year, or the year when the article was published?

Swadhina Koley basically, academics and researchers consider the Cumulative imp factor (CIF) to be a very crude measure. You can get a high score on this measure by publishing a lot of research in journals that aren't very prestigious, or by publishing a very small amount in highly prestigious journals. The term "cumulative impact factor" has also been used for measures of the impact factor of a journal over extended periods beyond the usual definition of impact factor. See for example:

http://www.garfield.library.upenn.edu/papers/impactofcumimpfacs.pdf

I don't believe that ISI has ever defined this term in their formal reports on the impact factors of journals, so I'm afraid that any use of the term will depend on the particular group or person that is computing the cumulative impact factor (Brian Borchers).

https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/32722/what-is-cumulative-impact-index-of-a-journal#:~:text=One%20definition%20is%20that%20the,that%20has%20impact%20factor%201.2.

Precisely, to my understanding, which could not be generalised, I believe the current year metrics are to be given importance.