The IF and Q rankings are obviously not independent, but there is an apparent switch from IF to Q ranking, and publication in Q1 journals is encouraged. What consequences, both positive and negative, may be envisaged?
I have followed the Quality Factor since its introduction by Prof. Mohemmed Seraj Ansari and i admire it over the commonly used Impact factor because it takes in consideration other variables other than the citation number. In my national universities, the QF is being widely adopted for supporting journal publication and staff promotion in academic degrees. So i think it is the quality measure of the future.
If by Q you mean Quartile, then it is actually ranking by impact factor. The Q is the evaluative range of the journal., and it is established by the journal's IF. You may consider the upper range of the journals' IF which is Q1, and that is fine.
Paralysis by analysis. It really doesn't matter what method you use, it is all about the difference you make. Einstein, Newton, Plato, Darwin, etc. could care less about how their published work would stack up in IF, Q or IFQ!
Good point! Many thanks! Recently we published a paper - that triggers a lot of attention on RG - in a non IF journal, but it may trigger more citations than several other papers we published in Q1 or Q2 journals, but as you say for academic advancement the sci-metrics count, and IF and QF are both serving the purpose.
I agree with Dr. Avishag Gordon. The Q (Quartile) rankings are based on IF distribution. The top 25% of journals in a particular subject category are placed in Q1; Q2 for middle-high position (between top 50% and top 25%), Q3 middle-low position (top 75% to top 50%), and Q4 the lowest position (bottom 25% of the IF distribution).
So, Q1 indicates the first tier journals in a particular subject.