Impact factors are still widely used in academic evaluations - despite efforts to dampen their influence. The merit of the work is what counts, rather than that of the journal or publisher: ✍️ | #ResearchCulture
Survey finds that 40% of research-intensive universities mention the journal impact factor in review documents — despite efforts to dampen its influence.
Nearly half of research-intensive universities consider journal impact factors when deciding whom to promote, survey.
Impact factors are still widely used in academic evaluations - despite efforts to dampen their influence. The merit of the work is what counts, rather than that of the journal or publisher: ✍️ | #ResearchCulture
About 40% of institutes with a strong focus on research mention impact factors in documents used in the review, promotion and tenure process, a survey finds.
About 40% of institutes with a strong focus on research mention impact factors in documents used in the review, promotion and tenure process, a survey finds.
"In more than 80% of the mentions at research-heavy universities, the language in the documents encouraged the use of the impact factor in academic evaluations." It is time for a better system.
About 40% of institutes with a strong focus on research mention impact factors in documents used in the review, promotion and tenure process, a survey finds.
Impact factors are still widely used in academic evaluations - "Survey finds that 40% of research-intensive universities mention the controversial metric in review documents — despite efforts to dampen its influence." #aclife
Impact factors are still widely used in academic evaluations, a metric that has been widely criticized as a crude and misleading proxy for the quality of scientists’ work
“Researchers deserve to be judged on the basis of what they have done, not simply where they have published — and to be given credit for the many contributions they make above and beyond the publication of research papers” -
Impact factors are still widely used in academic evaluations
Good article. But the they should've replaced used by misused "Impact factors are still widely misused in academic evaluations" #Impact factor
We are in ! "Impact factors are still widely used in academic evaluations". Quick facts: 40% of R-type unis mention the JIF, of those: 83% support using it; 61% associate it with "quality" or just read preprint:
"Survey finds that 40% of research-intensive universities mention the controversial metric in review documents — despite efforts to dampen its influence." - #impactfactor
Survey finds that 40% of research-intensive universities mention the controversial metric in review documents — despite efforts to dampen its influence.
Although impact factor and citations play some role, scientific evaluation cannot be limited to a number. Science evaluators should not be accountants.
Impact factors are still widely used in academic evaluations
Impact factors are still widely used in academic evaluations
#Impactfactors are still widely used in academic evaluations . Survey finds that 40% of #research-intensive universities mention the controversial #metric in review documents — despite efforts to dampen its influence.
That first citation is in Nature at
Impact factors are still widely used in academic evaluations