[Taxacom] are journal-ranking algorithms code-compliant?

Michael A. Ivie mivie at montana.edu
Tue Apr 14 17:48:24 CDT 2015


Citation Index is different from Impact Factor.  CI is paper specific 
and traces the web of citations of papers, while IF is Journal Specific 
and claims to measure quality.

IF is not nearly used universally, and my feeling is that  it is used 
more in Europe than North America. Therefore, there is no stranglehold 
in general, although in some places there is.  In the US, it seems to be 
more important in lower ranked universities that have pretensions to 
move up.  I have no real data on this beyond the fact that I receive 
requests from very highly regarded universities to evaluate the quality 
and importance of pubs in my area for promotion and tenure evaluations 
of peers.   These peer evaluations are  used instead of IF.

There have been documentations of its inapplicability to systematics, see:
  Elliot Shubert (2012) Use and misuse of the Impact Factor, Systematics 
and Biodiversity, 10:4, 391-394,
DOI: 10.1080/14772000.2012.753716

Mike

On 4/14/2015 4:34 PM, Dr Brian Taylor wrote:
> Citation Index was being actively promoted over 40 years ago and even
> earlier my then boss (a medic) commented that as a scientist I "had to
> publish or perish", so it is a bit late to hope to change that system.  As a
> taxonomist take comfort in that fact that we cite papers, e.g Linnaeus, that
> go back well over 200 years.
>
>
>
>
> On 14/04/2015 23:18, "Stephen Thorpe" <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz> wrote:
>
>> Fred asked: Why does anyone participate in this business, and how did it
>> obtain its stranglehold on evaluations?
> An interesting question, for which I
>> will suggest tentative answers. Firstly, it is more sensible in theory than it
>> is in practice. ALL OTHER THINGS BEING EQUAL, an article with more citations
>> is "better" (more relevant to science and/or society) than one with fewer
>> citations. Of course, one with 10 citations isn't really better than one with
>> 9 citations, but one with 1000 citations is better than one with 10. But, the
>> crucial point is that ALL OTHER THINGS ARE NEVER EQUAL! We are now in a silly
>> position of comparing apples with strawberries, rather than apples with
>> apples! Secondly, I think we need to understand it from the perspective of
>> managers. They are not in a position to judge "quality", so they try to
>> quantify "quality" by way of some objective measure. The problem is that when
>> you put together the above two factors, the result is
>> nonsense!
> Stephen
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Wed,
>> 15/4/15, Fred Schueler <bckcdb at istar.ca> wrote:
>   Subject: Re: [Taxacom] are
>> journal-ranking algorithms code-compliant?
>   To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>
>> Received: Wednesday, 15 April, 2015, 10:55 AM
>   
>   On 4/14/2015 4:38 PM,
>
>> Michael A. Ivie wrote:
>   > If anyone is
>   thinking that citing the paper is
>> going to help impact
>   > factors, think again, as only the
>   citations in the
>> first 2  years post
>   >
>   publication are counted.  The half-life of a
>> taxonomic
>   paper may be 50
>   > years, but that does
>   not matter.
>   
>   * bringing
>> the
>   discussion back to my initial point of the foolishness of
>   
>   this
>> procedure. Why does anyone participate
>   in this business, and how
>   did it
>> obtain its
>   stranglehold on evaluations?
>   
>   fred.
>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>          
>>     Frederick W. Schueler
>   & Aleta Karstad
>   Daily Paintings -
>> http://karstaddailypaintings.blogspot.com/
>   Vulnerable Watersheds -
>> http://vulnerablewaters.blogspot.ca/
>   Mudpuppy Night in Oxford Mills -
>> http://pinicola.ca/mudpup1.htm
>        RR#2 Bishops Mills, Ontario,
>   Canada K0G
>> 1T0
>       on the Smiths Falls
>   Limestone Plain 44* 52'N 75* 42'W
>    
>
>>     (613)258-3107 <bckcdb at istar.ca> http://pinicola.ca/
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>   Taxacom Mailing List
>
>> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>   The Taxacom
>> Archive back to 1992 may be
>   searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
>   
>
>> Celebrating 28 years of
>   Taxacom in 2015.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing
>> List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/list
>> info/taxacom
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
>> http://taxacom.markmail.org
> Celebrating 28 years of Taxacom in 2015.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> Celebrating 28 years of Taxacom in 2015.

-- 
__________________________________________________

Michael A. Ivie, Ph.D., F.R.E.S.

Montana Entomology Collection
Marsh Labs, Room 50
1911 West Lincoln Street
NW corner of Lincoln and S.19th
Montana State University
Bozeman, MT 59717
USA

(406) 994-4610 (voice)
(406) 994-6029 (FAX)
mivie at montana.edu




More information about the Taxacom mailing list