Misplaced Pages

#169830

50-467: These quantitative comparisons between researchers are mostly done to distribute resources (such as money and academic positions). However, there is still debate in the academic world about how effectively author-level metrics accomplish this objective. Author-level metrics differ from journal-level metrics , which attempt to measure the bibliometric impact of academic journals rather than individuals, and from article-level metrics , which attempt to measure

100-683: A "useful yardstick with which to compare, in an unbiased way, different individuals competing for the same resource when an important evaluation criterion is scientific achievement." However, other members of the scientific community, and even Hirsch himself, have criticized them as particularly susceptible to gaming the system . Work in bibliometrics has demonstrated multiple techniques for the manipulation of popular author-level metrics. The most used metric h -index can be manipulated through self-citations, and even computer-generated nonsense documents can be used for that purpose, for example using SCIgen . Metrics can also be manipulated by coercive citation ,

150-411: A convincing case. Have ten committees, each committee, each composed of twelve scientists, appointed to pass on these applications. Take the most active scientists out of the laboratory and make them members of these committees. And the very best men in the field should be appointed as chairman at salaries of fifty thousand dollars each. Also have about twenty prizes of one hundred thousand dollars each for

200-505: A free copy of the book from the journal in exchange for a timely review. Publishers send books to book review editors in the hope that their books will be reviewed. The length and depth of research book reviews varies much from journal to journal, as does the extent of textbook and trade book review. An academic journal's prestige is established over time, and can reflect many factors, some but not all of which are expressible quantitatively. In each academic discipline , some journals receive

250-412: A high number of submissions and opt to restrict how many they publish, keeping the acceptance rate low. Size or prestige are not a guarantee of reliability. In the natural sciences and in the social sciences , the impact factor is an established proxy, measuring the number of later articles citing articles already published in the journal. There are other quantitative measures of prestige, such as

300-428: A journal article will be available for download in two formats: PDF and HTML, although other electronic file types are often supported for supplementary material. Articles are indexed in bibliographic databases as well as by search engines. E-journals allow new types of content to be included in journals, for example, video material, or the data sets on which research has been based. With the growth and development of

350-679: A litany of observed bibliometric measures on the journal level that can be used as surrogates for quality and thus eliminate the need for subjective assessment. Consequently, several journal-level metrics have been proposed, most citation-based : Negative consequences of rankings are generally well-documented and relate to the performativity of using journal rankings for performance measurement purposes. Studies of methodological quality and reliability have found that "reliability of published research works in several fields may be decreasing with increasing journal rank", contrary to widespread expectations. For example, McKinnon (2017) has analyzed how

400-440: A number of the journals on this list, threatened to sue Beall in 2013 and Beall stopped publishing in 2017, citing pressure from his university. A US judge fined OMICS $ 50 million in 2019 stemming from an FTC lawsuit. Some academic journals use the registered report format, which aims to counteract issues such as data dredging and hypothesizing after the results are known. For example, Nature Human Behaviour has adopted

450-408: A practice in which an editor of a journal forces authors to add spurious citations to their own articles before the journal will agree to publish it. Additionally, if the h -index is considered as a decision criterion for research funding agencies, the game-theoretic solution to this competition implies increasing the average length of coauthors' lists . A study analyzing >120 million papers in

500-453: A print journal in structure: there is a table of contents which lists the articles, and many electronic journals still use a volume/issue model, although some titles now publish on a continuous basis. Online journal articles are a specialized form of electronic document : they have the purpose of providing material for academic research and study, and they are formatted approximately like journal articles in traditional printed journals. Often,

550-468: A profit. They often accept advertising, page and image charges from authors to pay for production costs. On the other hand, some journals are produced by commercial publishers who do make a profit by charging subscriptions to individuals and libraries. They may also sell all of their journals in discipline-specific collections or a variety of other packages. Journal editors tend to have other professional responsibilities, most often as teaching professors. In

SECTION 10

#1733104743170

600-437: A study in a given field, or for current awareness of those already in the field. Reviews of scholarly books are checks upon the research books published by scholars; unlike articles, book reviews tend to be solicited. Journals typically have a separate book review editor determining which new books to review and by whom. If an outside scholar accepts the book review editor's request for a book review, he or she generally receives

650-478: A surrogate measure of the quality of individual research articles, to assess an individual scientist's contributions, or in hiring, promotion, or funding decisions". The Community for Responsible Research in Business Management (cRRBM) asks whether "even the academy is being served when faculty members are valued for the quantity and placement of their articles, not for the benefit their research can have for

700-541: A work for potential publication without directly being asked to do so. Upon receipt of a submitted article, editors at the journal determine whether to reject the submission outright or begin the process of peer review . In the latter case, the submission becomes subject to review by outside scholars of the editor's choosing who typically remain anonymous. The number of these peer reviewers (or "referees") varies according to each journal's editorial practice – typically, no fewer than two, though sometimes three or more, experts in

750-410: Is a periodical publication in which scholarship relating to a particular academic discipline is published. They serve as permanent and transparent forums for the presentation, scrutiny, and discussion of research . They nearly universally require peer review for research articles or other scrutiny from contemporaries competent and established in their respective fields. Content usually takes

800-538: Is possible to try the predictions using an online tool. However, later work has shown that since h -index is a cumulative measure, it contains intrinsic auto-correlation that led to significant overestimation of its predictability. Thus, the true predictability of future h -index is much lower compared to what has been claimed before. The h -index can be timed to analyze its evolution during one's career, employing different time windows. Some academics, such as physicist Jorge E. Hirsch , have praised author-level metrics as

850-722: The Royal Society established Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society in March 1665, and the Académie des Sciences established the Mémoires de l'Académie des Sciences in 1666, which focused on scientific communications. By the end of the 18th century, nearly 500 such periodicals had been published, the vast majority coming from Germany (304 periodicals), France (53), and England (34). Several of those publications, in particular

900-621: The SCImago Journal Rank , CiteScore , Eigenfactor , and Altmetrics . In the Anglo-American humanities , there is no tradition (as there is in the sciences) of giving impact-factors that could be used in establishing a journal's prestige. Recent moves have been made by the European Science Foundation (ESF) to change the situation, resulting in the publication of preliminary lists for the ranking of academic journals in

950-667: The ABS-AJG ranking, which in spite of its methodological shortcomings is widely accepted in British business schools, has had negative consequences for the transportation and logistics management disciplines. A study published in 2021 compared the Impact Factor, Eigenfactor Score, SCImago Journal & Country Rank and the Source Normalized Impact per Paper, in journals related to Pharmacy, Toxicology and Biochemistry. It discovered there

1000-549: The Dolphins and Other Stories". Senator J. Lister Hill read excerpts of this criticism in a 1962 senate hearing on the slowing of government-funded cancer research . Szilard's work focuses on metrics slowing scientific progress, rather than on specific methods of gaming: "As a matter of fact, I think it would be quite easy. You could set up a foundation, with an annual endowment of thirty million dollars. Research workers in need of funds could apply for grants, if they could mail out

1050-524: The German journals, tended to be short-lived (under five years). A.J. Meadows has estimated the proliferation of journals to reach 10,000 journals in 1950, and 71,000 in 1987. Michael Mabe wrote that the estimates will vary depending on the definition of what exactly counts as a scholarly publication, but that the growth rate has been "remarkably consistent over time", with an average rate of 3.46% per year from 1800 to 2003. In 1733, Medical Essays and Observations

SECTION 20

#1733104743170

1100-458: The Royal Society (March 1665), and Mémoires de l'Académie des Sciences (1666). The first fully peer-reviewed journal was Medical Essays and Observations (1733). The idea of a published journal with the purpose of "[letting] people know what is happening in the Republic of Letters " was first conceived by François Eudes de Mézeray in 1663. A publication titled Journal littéraire général

1150-399: The aspects common to all academic field journals. Scientific journals and journals of the quantitative social sciences vary in form and function from journals of the humanities and qualitative social sciences; their specific aspects are separately discussed. The first academic journal was Journal des sçavans (January 1665), followed soon after by Philosophical Transactions of

1200-821: The author deposits a paper in a disciplinary or institutional repository where it can be searched for and read, or via publishing it in a free open access journal , which does not charge for subscriptions , being either subsidized or financed by a publication fee . Given the goal of sharing scientific research to speed advances, open access has affected science journals more than humanities journals. Commercial publishers are experimenting with open access models, but are trying to protect their subscription revenues. The much lower entry cost of on-line publishing has also raised concerns of an increase in publication of "junk" journals with lower publishing standards. These journals, often with names chosen as similar to well-established publications, solicit articles via e-mail and then charge

1250-468: The author to publish an article, often with no sign of actual review . Jeffrey Beall , a research librarian at the University of Colorado , has compiled a list of what he considers to be "potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access publishers"; the list numbered over 300 journals as of April 2013, but he estimates that there may be thousands. The OMICS Publishing Group , which publishes

1300-598: The best scientific papers of the year. This is just about all you would have to do. Your lawyers could easily prepare a charter for the foundation. As a matter of fact, any of the National Science Foundation bills which were introduced in the Seventy-ninth and Eightieth Congress could perfectly well serve as a model." "First of all, the best scientists would be removed from their laboratories and kept busy on committees passing on applications for funds. Secondly

1350-567: The biases and personal career objectives of those involved in ranking the journals; also causing the problem of highly disparate evaluations across institutions. Consequently, many institutions have required external sources of evaluation of journal quality. The traditional approach here has been through surveys of leading academics in a given field, but this approach too has potential for bias, though not as profound as that seen with institution-generated lists. Consequently, governments, institutions, and leaders in scientometric research have turned to

1400-410: The case of the largest journals, there are paid staff assisting in the editing. The production of the journals is almost always done by publisher-paid staff. Humanities and social science academic journals are usually subsidized by universities or professional organization. The cost and value proposition of subscription to academic journals is being continuously re-assessed by institutions worldwide. In

1450-612: The context of the big deal cancellations by several library systems in the world, data analysis tools like Unpaywall Journals are used by libraries to estimate the specific cost and value of the various options: libraries can avoid subscriptions for materials already served by instant open access via open archives like PubMed Central. The Internet has revolutionized the production of, and access to, academic journals, with their contents available online via services subscribed to by academic libraries . Individual articles are subject-indexed in databases such as Google Scholar . Some of

1500-421: The fashions would get grants. Those who wouldn’t would not, and pretty soon they would learn to follow the fashion, too." Journal-level metrics Journal ranking is widely used in academic circles in the evaluation of an academic journal 's impact and quality. Journal rankings are intended to reflect the place of a journal within its field, the relative difficulty of being published in that journal, and

1550-592: The form of articles presenting original research , review articles , or book reviews . The purpose of an academic journal, according to Henry Oldenburg (the first editor of Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society ), is to give researchers a venue to "impart their knowledge to one another, and contribute what they can to the Grand design of improving natural knowledge, and perfecting all Philosophical Arts, and Sciences." The term academic journal applies to scholarly publications in all fields; this article discusses

Author-level metrics - Misplaced Pages Continue

1600-444: The foundation of arXiv in 1991 for the dissemination of preprints to be discussed prior to publication in a journal, and the establishment of PLOS One in 2006 as the first megajournal . There are two kinds of article or paper submissions in academia : solicited, where an individual has been invited to submit work either through direct contact or through a general submissions call, and unsolicited, where an individual submits

1650-424: The humanities. These rankings have been severely criticized, notably by history and sociology of science British journals that have published a common editorial entitled "Journals under Threat". Though it did not prevent ESF and some national organizations from proposing journal rankings , it largely prevented their use as evaluation tools. In some disciplines such as knowledge management / intellectual capital ,

1700-448: The impact of individual articles. However, metrics originally developed for academic journals can be reported at researcher level, such as the author-level eigenfactor and the author impact factor. L -index is automatically calculated by the Exaly database. There are a number of models proposed to incorporate the relative contribution of each author to a paper, for instance by accounting for

1750-694: The lack of a well-established journal ranking system is perceived by academics as "a major obstacle on the way to tenure, promotion and achievement recognition". Conversely, a significant number of scientists and organizations consider the pursuit of impact factor calculations as inimical to the goals of science, and have signed the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment to limit its use. Three categories of techniques have developed to assess journal quality and create journal rankings: Many academic journals are subsidized by universities or professional organizations, and do not exist to make

1800-611: The overall number of citations, how quickly articles are cited, and the average " half-life " of articles. Clarivate Analytics ' Journal Citation Reports , which among other features, computes an impact factor for academic journals, draws data for computation from the Science Citation Index Expanded (for natural science journals), and from the Social Sciences Citation Index (for social science journals). Several other metrics are also used, including

1850-456: The paper resulting from this peer-reviewed procedure will be published, regardless of the study outcomes." Some journals are born digital in that they are solely published on the web and in a digital format. Though most electronic journals originated as print journals, which subsequently evolved to have an electronic version, while still maintaining a print component, others eventually became electronic-only. An e-journal closely resembles

1900-430: The prestige associated with it. They have been introduced as official research evaluation tools in several countries. Traditionally, journal ranking "measures" or evaluations have been provided simply through institutional lists established by academic leaders or through a committee vote. These approaches have been notoriously politicized and inaccurate reflections of actual prestige and quality, as they would often reflect

1950-420: The rank in the sequence of authors. A generalization of the h -index and some other indices that gives additional information about the shape of the author's citation function (heavy-tailed, flat/peaked, etc.) has been proposed. Because the h -index was never meant to measure future publication success, recently, a group of researchers has investigated the features that are most predictive of future h -index. It

2000-495: The registered report format, as it "shift[s] the emphasis from the results of research to the questions that guide the research and the methods used to answer them". The European Journal of Personality defines this format: "In a registered report, authors create a study proposal that includes theoretical and empirical background, research questions/hypotheses, and pilot data (if available). Upon submission, this proposal will then be reviewed prior to data collection, and if accepted,

2050-511: The research published in journals. Some journals are devoted entirely to review articles, some contain a few in each issue, and others do not publish review articles. Such reviews often cover the research from the preceding year, some for longer or shorter terms; some are devoted to specific topics, some to general surveys. Some reviews are enumerative , listing all significant articles in a given subject; others are selective, including only what they think worthwhile. Yet others are evaluative, judging

Author-level metrics - Misplaced Pages Continue

2100-445: The scientific workers in need of funds would concentrate on problems which were considered promising and were pretty certain to lead to publishable results. For a few years there might be a great increase in scientific output; but by going after the obvious, pretty soon science would dry out. Science would become something like a parlor game. Somethings would be considered interesting, others not. There would be fashions. Those who followed

2150-429: The smallest, most specialized journals are prepared in-house, by an academic department, and published only online – this has sometimes been in the blog format, though some, like the open access journal Internet Archaeology , use the medium to embed searchable datasets, 3D models, and interactive mapping. Currently, there is a movement in higher education encouraging open access, either via self archiving , whereby

2200-447: The specific field of biology showed that the validity of citation-based measures is being compromised and their usefulness is lessening. As predicted by Goodhart's law , quantity of publications is not a good metric anymore as a result of shorter papers and longer author lists. Leo Szilard , the inventor of the nuclear chain reaction , also expressed criticism of the decision-making system for scientific funding in his book "The Voice of

2250-440: The state of progress in the subject field. Some journals are published in series, each covering a complete subject field year, or covering specific fields through several years. Unlike original research articles, review articles tend to be solicited or "peer-invited" submissions, often planned years in advance, which may themselves go through a peer-review process once received. They are typically relied upon by students beginning

2300-658: The subject matter of the article produce reports upon the content, style, and other factors, which inform the editors' publication decisions. Though these reports are generally confidential, some journals and publishers also practice public peer review . The editors either choose to reject the article, ask for a revision and resubmission, or accept the article for publication. Even accepted articles are often subjected to further (sometimes considerable) editing by journal editorial staff before they appear in print. The peer review can take from several weeks to several months. Review articles, also called "reviews of progress", are checks on

2350-644: The world". Some academic disciplines such as management exhibit a journal ranking lists paradox: on the one hand, researchers are aware of the numerous limitations of ranking lists and their deleterious impact on scientific progress; on the other hand, they generally find journal ranking lists to be useful and employ them, in particular, when the use of ranking lists is not mandated by their institutions. Several national and international rankings of journals exist, e.g.: They have been introduced as official research evaluation tools in several countries. Academic journal An academic journal or scholarly journal

2400-399: Was "a moderate to high and significant correlation" between them. Thousands of universities and research bodies issued official statements denouncing the idea that research quality can be measured based on the uni-dimensional scale of a journal ranking, most notably by signing the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA), which asked "not [to] use journal-based metrics ... as

2450-470: Was established by the Medical Society of Edinburgh as the first fully peer-reviewed journal. Peer review was introduced as an attempt to increase the quality and pertinence of submissions. Other important events in the history of academic journals include the establishment of Nature (1869) and Science (1880), the establishment of Postmodern Culture in 1990 as the first online-only journal ,

2500-496: Was supposed to be published to fulfill that goal, but never was. Humanist scholar Denis de Sallo (under the pseudonym "Sieur de Hédouville") and printer Jean Cusson took Mazerai's idea, and obtained a royal privilege from King Louis XIV on 8 August 1664 to establish the Journal des sçavans . The journal's first issue was published on 5 January 1665. It was aimed at people of letters , and had four main objectives: Soon after,

#169830