Today's science is vast. It has so many fields. Of course, all are related to each other but they have different identities. All research purposes are for mankind. Some journals have a high impact and some are lower. One example, in essential oil research fields, the Journal of Essential Oil Research is one of the best journals in this field for researchers but its impact factor is less than 1. So, in my opinion, every field has at least 1 or 2 journals which impact factor is higher. This is needed because impact factor reflects the quality of researchers and their works. What is your opinion?
There must also be a correlation between IF and citations. It is amazing how many papers are published in high IF journals, but with little or no citations. What is the use of publishing in a high IF journal if no one is reading the article? So publishing in high IF journals alone is not sufficient, it must also be judged by number of citations. The focus should not only be on IFs of journals, but also on relevance to the associated discipline(s).
This got sent to my e-mail today on the ugly side of journal impact factor. It is quite disheartening if any is true.
http://www.americanbiotechnologist.com/blog/jif/?mkt_tok=3RkMMJWWfF9wsRohu6%2FMZKXonjHpfsX57e8lX6CylMI%2F0ER3fOvrPUfGjI4HTsZmI%2BSLDwEYGJlv6SgFSLfHMbRo1rgOWRg%3D
The impact factor of a journal depends on the number of scientists in its field. If there are many researchers in this field, the journal would accordingly have a higher IF.
The impact factor of a journal depends on the number of scientists in its field. If there are many researchers in this field, the journal would accordingly have a higher IF.
Thank Dr. Devang Pandya and Dr. Jeffrey Slack for nice information regarding website.
All scientific journals should be very rigorous in the review process of proposals for articles submitted for publication. The review process should be very strict and the papers presented should be reviewed by experts in the field who should do their work in the best way possible and with the highest quality that can be. Cannot accept superficiality in the revision of the articles prepared for their subsequent publication and specialized magazines should have this in mind when selecting reviewers of papers. During the review of proposals for articles for publication by selected reviewers all elements that are considered relevant in assessing an article for later publication, including the quality and scientific rigor of the work, its importance to the scientific community, the actuality of the theme, their impact in the society, among others, should be taken into account.
There must also be a correlation between IF and citations. It is amazing how many papers are published in high IF journals, but with little or no citations. What is the use of publishing in a high IF journal if no one is reading the article? So publishing in high IF journals alone is not sufficient, it must also be judged by number of citations. The focus should not only be on IFs of journals, but also on relevance to the associated discipline(s).
I also believe that scientific merit must be considered on the basis of real scientific significance of the articles rather than journal’s impact factors which becomes more effective.
In my point of view..application oriented research must be given priority..wat's the matter if we publish in high IF journals..and no benefit to the society ....
The h-index is a good metric, but could be improved. For example, the ratio of a researcher's h-index to his/her total number of peer reviewed publications would downgrade those who succumb to quantity over quality.
Journal impact factors are probably over-used in the assessment of research outputs by individuals and groups. However, for the moment that is how things are. The link provided by Jeffrey Slack is very interesting and unfortunately, true. It
is important to remember that many things can influence the attractiveness of a manuscript for a journal. For example, research work that addresses local issues may be very important for that area, but not that interesting to an international audience.So despite the fact that the work may be rigorous, definitive and crucial to solving a significant local problem, its unlikely to be published in an international journal with a high impact factor simply because too few readers will be interested in it. Consequently, the work ends up being published in a local or national journal, which often have a much lower impact factor.
Another issue is that of emerging fields of research. When new ideas are being explored an/or old ones challenged, it can be difficult to get work published. A good example of this is the struggle encountered by the researchers Marshall and Warren who pioneered the link between the bacterium Helicobacter pylori and gastric ulcers. Generally, new "discoveries" inch their way up the impact factor ladder.
To a certain extent, researchers must play the game, while appreciating that it is just a means to an end. Publish your work where it will be seen by the people you want to see it, where others that may be able to help you can see it and where it will provide you the greatest amount of benefit to your scientific career.
Lots of things to consider...
Ya I agree with you Md. Nazrul, it all happens in the Scientific field because of the indexing services which the Journal have. Even among Indian Journal Current Science is highly reputed journal but its got Impact factor around 1. It all happens in the Scientific field, but never loose hopes if your work is really worthy for many researcher your research paper get recognized and u would get the Citation for that so certainly it will get ups in your H index and automatically it would increases the Impact factor of the journal as well.........
My pick of Journal depends on the quality of Reviewers the Jornal can provide for this given subject.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Chemistry