Deep Impact: Unintended consequences of journal rank

Connotea: stevehit's bookmarks matching tag 2013-01-21


"Abstract: Much has been said about the increasing bureaucracy in science, stifling innovation, hampering the creativity of researchers and incentivizing misconduct, even outright fraud. Many anecdotes have been recounted, observations described and conclusions drawn about the negative impact of impact assessment on scientists and science. However, few of these accounts have drawn their conclusions from data, and those that have typically relied on a few studies. In this review, we present the most recent and pertinent data on the consequences that our current scholarly communication system has had on various measures of scientific quality (such as utility/citations, methodological soundness, expert ratings and retractions). These data confirm previous suspicions: using journal rank as an assessment tool is bad scientific practice. Moreover, the data lead us to argue that any journal rank (not only the currently-favored Impact Factor) would have this negative impact. Therefore, we suggest that abandoning journals altogether, in favor of a library-based scholarly communication system, will ultimately be necessary. This new system will use modern information technology to vastly improve the filter, sort and discovery function of the current journal system." Posted by stevehit to pep.oa pep.biblio on Mon Jan 21 2013


From feeds:

Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) »
Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) » Connotea: stevehit's bookmarks matching tag

Tags: oa.libraries oa.arxiv oa.impact oa.quality oa.librarians oa.recommendations oa.rankings oa.studies oa.credibility pep.oa pep.biblio oa.repositories

Date tagged:

01/21/2013, 17:18

Date published:

01/21/2013, 12:18