作者: Björn Brembs , Katherine Button , Marcus Munafò
关键词: Unintended consequences 、 Journal ranking 、 Psychology 、 Scholarly communication 、 Filter (software) 、 Rank (computer programming) 、 Information technology 、 Impact factor 、 Positive economics 、 Data science 、 Impact assessment
摘要: Most researchers acknowledge an intrinsic hierarchy in the scholarly journals (“journal rank”) that they submit their work to, and adjust not only submission but also reading strategies accordingly. On other hand, much has been written about negative effects of institutionalizing journal rank as impact measure. So far, contributions to debate concerning limitations a scientific assessment tool have either lacked data, or relied on few studies. In this review, we present most recent pertinent data consequences our current communication system with respect various measures quality (such utility/citations, methodological soundness, expert ratings retractions). These corroborate previous hypotheses: using is bad practice. Moreover, lead us argue any (not currently-favored Impact Factor) would impact. Therefore, suggest abandoning altogether, favor library-based system, will ultimately be necessary. This new use modern information technology vastly improve filter, sort discovery functions system.