Great

Depends on your university or onational scientific policy. My universty honors publication in impact factor journals by giving some money in author's research fund. On the national level you need to earn points in journals indexed in WOS or Scopus.

As Mirna alludes to - there main difference is in terms of academic and scholarly outcomes i.e. funding, national/international reputation and other factors such as promotion and job applications. At the end of the day, in most scenarios, if you are comparing two academics (one with a low h-index and citation rate - and the other with high scores - even though they may be comparable in terms of years of service etc) - the 'system' is going to favour the high scorer - in most issues i.e successful research funding, short-listing for interviews etc. Low scoring (low impact) journals generally means low citation and low recognition of published studies - even if the studies are of good quality. This even equate to academic social media. If we take ResearchGate, for instance, those with high scores, reads, research interest etc are likely to be successful authors in the air field - who publish in established, high-ranking journals for that field.

Sorry, I am confused by but in the sentence

The scientist tries to publish in high-ranked places but he is not always able to publish in other journals, which are low-scoring or without points.

Could you please edit the question and/or clarify the meaning here?

Increase your academic visibility followed by rising your h-index sir.

Regards,

Emad

The academic recognition of your research is visualised through your publications in high impact factor journals . It gives the scientific impact of your research in scientific fraternity worldover, otherwise there will not be any credence to your research.

Everything depends on the answer to the questioń: „What are we doing it for?”

If it is just for mounting our h-index as suggested by Dean Whitehead (what is a good reason because of most of the evaluation systems), than publishing in high ranked journals may raise the visibility and provide so-called “inherited prestige” (no matter of the real value of the contribution as Witold Bogusz wrote). Another problem is editorial policy of the high ranked journals. I have no proof but strongly believe that papers with large number of references to earlier issues are cordially welcomed.

Similar result can be achieved by publishing in “open access journals”. Contributions with teasing titles like: “Basic aspects…” or “Fundamental issues …” may also have high citing potential just because they appear in internet searches.

It is a paradox but I strongly believe that most of those cited papers have never been read :-)

Dear Friends and Colleagues of RG,

What are the determinants of choosing certain types of scientific journals to publish articles, including taking into account the differences in Impact Factor scoring?

What are the other determinants of choosing certain types of scientific journals to publish articles?

Please reply

I invite you to the discussion

Thank you very much

Best wishes

In reviewing process

All the high scoring journals follows standardized process of publication and the paper goes through a rigorous review process. Higher SJR score or H-index ( or even ABDC category)ensures the quality of a paper. If your paper publishes in good journal, it will tells upon your domain knowledge and acumen. If your paper finds place in a low scoring journal, academicians will not take you seriously. If you apply for job, it will not support you. It is always advisable to publish in journals with high score.

hat are the main differences between publishing in high-scoring scientific journals and low-scoring or no points?

Dear Research Fraternity,

Determinants of choosing a scientific journals as Prof Dariusz Asked(according to my understanding) are: SJR score, H-index and ABDC list.One should target such journals which have high SJR score or H-index or the journal is listed in ABDC list.

Kind Regards

Prafulla

Dear all,

I am publishing in a rather closed and newly emerging field (World Customs Law) so there are some necessities that are different from other fields:

1. We do have only two or three journals (one not peer-reviewed with a legal approach, 12 issues per year, Global trade and Customs Journal, no score available; and one peer-reviewed, 2 issuses per year, World Customs Journal, no score available...

2. if you have a paper you must see where to place it by contents - applied economic mesurements will not be published by the legal journal...

3. A third journal (peer-reviewed, 2 issues per year, Custom Scientific Journal) has been founded in 2010 and perished early in 2017...

4. In conclusion I am happy toq get my papers published at all; other journals rarely understand the questions and problems of the field...

Credibility is the major issue here. All of us want to publish in high ranking journals. However, such journals have exacting quality parameters and they reject mediocre or low-quality papers. In other words, publishing in a journal with high Impact Factor or CiteScore means that your paper has a minimum standard!

Publishing in high-scoring Scientific Journals requires more rigour and high standards. It thus carries with it a reputation factor for the author(s).

As long as the journal is a serious one (and you might ask your bosses which ones would be preferable in your field) everything is fine. High ranking (IF) may not be a good metric, actually.

High impact factor is most often synonymous with notoriety.

High scoring journals can increase visibility and reputation in research community but may not be true representation as seen in many areas but should be measured by the quality of works published.

Dariusz Prokopowicz: Your premise is false. I know plenty of scholars who do not care about IF at all, and instead publish where they usually do, as being known by an editorial board can be of great help - if the previous papers have been varied and good (enough). There are also other factors. One that you may not know, Dariusz, is that some journals with a very low IF have top-notch editorial boards that reject basically everything, not just for the fun of it, but because they have an aversion against certain trends.

So I recommend adjusting the claim you make, or try to contradict me. :-)

By the way, I like the new picture, compared to the former, which was a bit tacky, with the religious connotations.

High impact factor journals ==> Visibility + Recognition + trust + helping-hand in applications.

I would assume that the focus on IF on published papers varies - or, indeed, I have seen such examples. So probably different domains in science have different criteria regarding acceptable IF.

For a novice researcher, I would advice publish in a journal without JIF, then gradually challenge yourself to a little more difficult journal and so on.

The supervisor needs to play a vital role in choosing the journal to submit to, of course, especially at the start of the PhD study, as well as the PhD courses to take, and symposia/workshops to attend and be active in.

Is choosing a journal to publish a scientific text crucial for the later recognition of this text in the world of science? Is the choice of a journal to publish a scientific text crucial in the context of the readership of the published text and its citation?

The right choice of journal to publish scientific results is an important issue. To properly choose a journal to publish the results of research, it is necessary to take into account the following determinants during the selection: issues, profiling the journal for a specific scientific discipline, which should result from the title of the journal; the issue of reputation, recognition of a particular magazine in the world of science; specific Impact Factor level; form of magazine publication, i.e. traditional / printed and / or electronic publication; open access formula issue; the issue of entering a journal and / or published articles in various indexation databases of scientific publications; publishing institution, its type and the issue of recognition in the world of science.

In view of the above, the following relevant questions arise:

- Is the selection of a journal to publish a scientific text crucial for the subsequent recognition of this text in the world of science?

- Is the choice of a journal to publish a scientific text crucial in the context of the readership of the published text and its citation?

What is your opinion on this topic?

Please reply,

I invite you to discuss

Thank you so much for participating in the discussion,

Greetings,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

Dear Dariusz Prokopowicz, the choice of the right journal to publish your work is definitely a crucial step in every respect (worldwide recognition, readership, citations etc.). You should always try to go for high-impact, reputable journals, but at the same time you also need to be realistic. Thus it is a balancing act for which you need to be experienced.

Senior faculty - like me - tend to not care at all about stuff like IF, which anyway fluctuates rather a lot over time. There is also not necessarily a positive correlation between IF and how tough the reviewers are - which is actually the most important factor in the game of getting an acceptance of your manuscript.

I have, for example, published a rather good paper indeed with a high IF, only to see its IF reduced a few years later to almost zero - and yet they are as tough as before, as far as I can understand.

So don't assume that higher IF means tougher reviewers - it's an urban legend.

And we shall publish in reputable journals - rather than reputed ones.

The space between these may be oceans!!

The answer to the original question is: typically none whatsoever.

Dariocz: your questions:

- Is the selection of a journal to publish a scientific text crucial for the subsequent recognition of this text in the world of science?

- Is the choice of a journal to publish a scientific text crucial in the context of the readership of the published text and its citation?

==

My notes:

If the journal is shady, fraudulent, or open access only, you can just as well throw the paper away, based on how badly they are run. From that perspective, it is very important to select a few journals that you may know, or have heard of, and to check that those journals rather often have papers whose topics are not very far from your potential paper.

So yes, you should browse, and read some recent papers in very good journals in your field, in order to get a feel of what the editorial board likes.

It is indeed important that the paper finds itself in a journal that clearly fits - otherwise it might be skipped over by the readers, and you will only have to rely of luck - that a scientist happen to tick the right buzz words so that your search string gets a catch.

I haven't heard that some journal publication yields any "points" to the author(s). It appears to me to be silly to break down 1 unit into as many fractions as the number of authors, or whatever. It seems clear to me to be a waste of time, as bosses will not look at it, anyway.

The whole idea with numerical scores I think is a charade: I know a few editors, and no-one has mentioned that there exist such a thing - even in an immaterial form.

Finally, what with the veritable flood of articles that are issued, with a very high probability, your journal paper will not be read by anyone than yourself - the flood of mediocre paper drowns the good ones.

Yes, I am that pessimistic - the business of publishing is somewhat of a scam these days - and we take part in it, whether we like it or not. I am near the point where I wonder what everyone - including I - actually are doing, and if it should continue: based on the rubbish that one sees - at RG especially, perhaps - what with the flood of meta-papers - what's the point of yet another metaheuristic that can't solve anything? It's a waste of space, most of what I see.

Publishing in high scoring journal is beneficial in development of academic carrier. As well, standard studies are mostly available in high scoring journals. The process of publication in high scoring journal is taking lengthy duration. Though, the academic validity and recognition is comparatively high.

What do you mean by points, Dariocz? I have never heard of points being distributed. Wherefrom did you get that idea?

As many say, publishing in high IF journal would increase your visibility of article as well as value to your work while being evaluated.

It's a fallacy, you know: one year the IF might be high for the journal you just published in, but then it might fall to near-zero rather quickly. I would not brag about your high-IF paper.

It's much more important that your work has a bloody meaning to anyone - that someone has a use for what you've done. That might be long-lasting, whereas the bloody IF can fluctuate violently, and might drop to near-zero. I published a paper in a journal with an IF over 15, but only a few years later the journal's IF was below 2. NO use to brag, then, right??

Do not pay attention to these things you can't control. Work hard and be conscientious - and please DO write about something that more than you can have use for.

Hence this question is a rather useless one, in several dimensions. Stop it.

Dear Michael Patriksson, in our field of research (chemistry) my observation is the the IF's of most journals increase steadily over the years. I wouldn't say "Don't care about IF's" as in the end our most cited articles were published in high IF journals.

However, I fully agree with you that in the end it is much more important to publish results which are potentially useful to other researchers. For example, about 30 years ago we discovered a new class of chemical compounds termed "lanthanide amidinates". At the time of their discovery they were mere laboratory curiosities. In the following years, researchers all over the world found out that such compounds are useful both in materials science and in catalysis (see reference cited below). Needless to say that for me this development was more satisfying than counting IF's.

Article Lanthanide amidinates and guanidinates: From laboratory curi...

Very good, Frank! I happened to be a chemistry and physics enthusiast at high school, and bought and even read CRC:s thick book of tables and formulas in physics and chemistry - but it was a few decades since I used the word lanthanides! Thanks for the opportunity. :-)

I just wished that the conversation around here could be more scientific. At the moment this forum is more of a Facebook for PhD:s.

Great

Academic publishing, rankings, and scientific productivity constitute an essential part of every researcher's career. Publications in prestigious academic journals have a significant impact on the institutional rankings and help researchers to the grant funding. Nevertheless, the issue of «where» to publish became more important than «what» to publish.... However, moving away from the world-renowned databases and creating national publication standards would most certainly allow small groups of local academics to control the system of academic rankings and productivity. Academic database such as Scopus and Web of Science offer international and non-involved objectivity and therefore are fair and transparent.... Vershinina, S., Tarasova, O., & Strielkowski, W. (2017). Academic publishing, journal rankings, and scientific productivity. Terra Economicus, 15(4).

depends on multiple factors, not limiting to... research quality, interest in impact and prestige factors, field’s development.... Hall, C. M. (2011). Publish and perish? Bibliometric analysis, journal ranking and the assessment of research quality in tourism. Tourism Management, 32(1), 16-27.

Novelty of research findings, quality, prestige, intrinsic and extrinsic benefits...

Yuyuenyongwatana, R. P., & Carraher, S. M. (2008). Academic journal ranking: Important to strategic management and general management researchers?. Journal of Business Strategies, 25(2).

Wilhite, A. W., & Fong, E. A. (2012). Coercive citation in academic publishing. Science, 335(6068), 542-543.

Dear D A Gayan Nayanajith,

Thank you very much for participating in the discussion and for answering the question: What are the main differences between publishing in high-scoring scientific journals and low-scoring or no points? Thank you very much for the sent proposals of interesting topics, research issues, etc., related to this issue. The issue is indeed developmental. Thank you very much for your answer and participation in the discussion. You described the problem very well. I fully agree with your opinion on this topic. Yes, a very good proposal for a topic in this area. I am glad that this discussion is continued and that many people participate in the discussion and confirm the thesis about the high level of importance of the issues high-scoring scientific journals. Thank you very much for the given bibliographic sources and participation in the discussion. Thank you for the proposed sources of literature for this subject. I am looking forward to developing cooperation through joint participation in discussions on these interesting and important topics. In my opinion, joint discussions can be an inspiration to develop an interesting concept of new, interdisciplinary directions of scientific research and the development of scientific cooperation.

Thank you very much,

Have a nice day,

All the best,

Stay healthy!

Dariusz Prokopowicz

Dear Dariusz Prokopowicz "What are the main differences between publishing in high-scoring scientific journals and low-scoring or no points?": In my opinion the answer to this question is very clear and simple: When you publish in high-scoring / high-ranked journals, your research work is read worldwide and eventually cited by other researchers. Of course, this is always more tedious and means much more work. You need to adhere strictly to the journal's guidelines and present your work in an attractive manner. Publishing in low-scoring / low-ranked journals is much easier and means less work. But then, the work is perhaps not read worldwide and never cited. Decide for yourself!

Regarding "points" - whatever they are - I find them quite useless. A few journals in which I have published have always been very, very good, while the "score" have fluctuated a lot over the years. Therefore I do not bother with the scores - they do not measure anything that I am interested in, and to just mention IF, that measure is irrelevant for the journals I aim for. They are always very careful in getting good reviewers, and the only thing that fluctuates are the IF. I just don't bother with it, and the management have the same position, I think. I have in any case never heard a boss telling me to go for high-IF journals, and I for one see no difference in the quality of the papers in the their issues, whether IF fluctuates. It's simply a quite useless exercise to look for high IF journals, just because they have a high ranking, that's all. Perhaps some other universities have a different opinion, but that's what I have experienced.

Dear Michael Patriksson,

Yes, I have also noticed changes in the scores of the journals where I publish. The approach to journal scoring differs from one discipline to another. In addition, the number of high-scoring journals with low or no cost of publication, short waiting times for review and publication, etc. is very limited and varies across disciplines. Scoring approaches for journals of researchers and scientists vary. On the other hand, for universities, for university departments that verify the publication achievements of their employed research and teaching staff, the issue of scoring journals is unfortunately currently particularly important.

Best regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

Dear Dariusz Prokopowicz in general you should always aim to publish your valuable research results in high-ranked journals. Placing your research work in so-called top journals is generally not easy. In my personal experience a manuscript must meet the following criteria in order to get published in a top journal:

1. Aspects of novelty (no routine work)

2. Broad interest or high interest to specialists in the field

3. Excellent English style and grammar, easy to read

4. Perfect match with the scope of the journal

For more information please also see this instructive article entitled

How to Publish in Top Journals

http://www3.nccu.edu.tw/~jthuang/publish.pdf

This article is freely available as public full text on the general internet.

Dear Frank T. Edelmann,

Thank you very much for providing a guide on how to publish in the best magazines. Thank you for your participation in our discussions on various topics of interest.

Regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

I think that we ourselves are making a "monster" from high-ranking scientific journals. Nowadays, when we have the Internet, all magazines are equal. All scientific journals with high scores are only business at our expense. For the development of science, it is enough to publish in arxiv.org or similar preprints portal to fix your priority data and make an approbation at any conferences, if you need it. In this regard I fully agree with https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Michael-Patriksson