The types of metrics and their number increase and they get more sophisticated (and some might say pervasive). Is it a rather positive or a rather negative development for academia at large?
Larisa - personally, I see it as a positive. For me, it's good to have a range of metrics to illustrate my work, citation and impact. There was a time when there were only a few metrics - such as ISI Thomson Reuters and Scopus - but now there are many - and different types i.e. journal metrics, researcher metrics, academic social media metrics etc. The more that scholars use these metrics - the more their work is visible and the more that reseachers can see where their work is being cited etc.
Personally I think it gives a much better, comprehensive and transparent evaluation of a journal's worth.
Система показателей – иерархическая система показатели -> критерии -> метрики, где каждая метрика имеет свой «весовой» коэффициент. Метрики с низким весовым коэффициентом можно отбросить, таким образом, оптимизируется количество метрик, т.е. показателей.
I think the idea ,information and impact of the research topic is very important to get more citations and the second factor is the journal that publish your article its better to be google scholar indexed at least.
It is supposed to be good, but I believe this can be very misleading at the same time. In some instances it appears to be more (show)business than knowledge oriented trend.
Increasing metrics has caused intense chaos in academic domain. It demands to do another Ph.D on academic metrics to understand and comprehend the differences (nuances) between SCI, SCIE and ESCI and Q1, Q2 , Q3 and Q4. Our state university maintains a list of journals pertaining to ISI which features only SCI journals. Journal of Manufacturing Process (JMP) is a top journal in Manufacturing field published by Elsevier. It's not easy to publish which follows a rigorous review process and the rejection rate is too high. It was moved to SCIE from SCI couple of years ago and the university removed this journal from the list. Those scholars who published their articles in this journal were unable to submit their dissertations for the award of doctoral degree. On the other hand, those journals which were commenced publication only in this decade or few years ago also indexed in SCI/SCIE. There are predatory journals which are indexed SCI/SCIE and Scopus. Some journals stay in one category for few years and subsequently promoted or kicked out of the database. It is clear that one can purchase the index by influence and money. I wish that all the open access journals which demand open access fee from authors should be removed from existing indexing system (ISI and Scopus) and a separate system should be used for them. There is an intense competition between journals to boost impact factor annually and go up the ladder of indexing. Reputed journals play numerous tricks to boost impact factor to remain atop. There is certainly a conspiracy behind every metric system to bamboozle us. Each additional metric system is also an attempt to trample a growing X where X is a journal/institute/researcher/country.
I think type of research topic may influence its meterics