Are there any scientists here, active in selection and funding committees, that support using the impact factors as a proxy for article or researcher quality? Regarding all the valid points against it I am seriously interested in valid reasons to continue using the IF for these purposes.
Hi Jeroen - I can say that I am a committee member that does not place IF as the 'proxy' measure for allocating funding - but I can suggest that, in the absence of an established funding 'track-record', it might be an 'added' consideration. The quality of the study proposal, overall, alongside the 'generic' quality of the research-team is more important.
Thanks for responding Dan. Good to hear that various types of information on the quality of the proposal/researcher are considered sensibly. I am planning to write a short piece on intrinsic scientometric problems of the IF but in the end decisions on how to evaluate researchers, proposals etc is a sociotechnical one. That's why I also want to get insight into why and how IF factors are used in these evaluation processes.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Academic Journals