 |
|
The Journal Impact Factor DenominatorDefining Citable (Counted) Items
Marie E. McVeigh, MS;
Stephen J. Mann
JAMA. 2009;302(10):1107-1109.
|
|
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
|
|
Over its 30-year history, the journal impact factor has been the subject of much discussion and debate.1 From its first release in 1975, bibliometricians and library scientists discussed its value and its vagaries. In the last decade, discussion has shifted to the way in which impact factor data are used. In an environment eager for objective measures of productivity, relevance, and research value, the impact factor has been applied broadly and indiscriminately.2-3 The impact factor has gone from being a measure of a journal's citation influence in the broader literature to a surrogate that assesses the scholarly value of work published in that journal. These misappropriated metrics have been used to assess individual researchers, institutions, and departments.
Such evaluation practices put pressure on scholars to publish in high-impact journals. To continue attracting manuscripts and authors, editors and publishers are pressured to ensure a . . . [Full Text of this Article]
Author Affiliations: Bibliographic Policy, Journal Citation Reports, Thomson Reuters, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
RELATED ARTICLE
Comparisons of Citations in Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar for Articles Published in General Medical Journals
Abhaya V. Kulkarni, Brittany Aziz, Iffat Shams, and Jason W. Busse
JAMA. 2009;302(10):1092-1096.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|
