Should we ditch impact factors?

Unknown author

33 citations0/0 files storedBMJ

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

scientometrics and bibliometrics research Publishing and Scholarly Communication Academic Writing and Publishing

Abstract

Even advocates of impact factors admit that they are a flawed measure of quality. Gareth Williams believes we should get rid of them whereas Richard Hobbs thinks refinement is the answer

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 33 citations exist upstream.

References

1998The Journal “Impact Factor”2003Counting on citations: a flawed way to measure quality 2004The level of non-citation of articles within a journal as a measure of quality: a comparison to the impact factor 1999Impact factors: Use and abuse in biomedical research

Cited by

2012Grim tales about the impact factor and the h-index in the Web of Science and the Journal Citation Reports databases: reflections on Vanclay’s criticism 2009Impact of Excessive Journal Self-Citations: A Case Study on the Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica Journal 2009Trend towards multiple authorship in occupational medicine journals 2008Researcher identification: the right needle in the haystack 2011An Analysis on the Research Ethics Cases Managed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Between 1997 and 2010 2010Impact factor—strengths and weaknesses 2015Impact factor – benefits and limitations 2014Are we happy with the impact factor?

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.