Citations and publication of journals into impact factors journals are some of the benchmarks used to measure research rigorousness and research quality. However, it is also possible that some of "research rigorousness" may not be a true representation. Some say that similar co-authors are appearing in articles giving the impression that other than main author, the rest are riding along as passive co-authors. Also, more articles based on mere re-phrased of existing articles and citations of articles authorised by friends, are appearing in the journals.
I would like to promote a positive and constructive argument on this subject. What do you think about the current quality of articles in published journals? Is the current model still suitable for our needs? What do we want from publish articles? Is it a conspiracy? What can be done to promote more honest and real impact among published articles?
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Journal Impact Factor