Comments on: The Impact Factor: Past its Expiry Date https://access.okfn.org/2012/06/22/the-impact-factor-past-its-expiry-date/ Sharing the results of publicly funded research Sun, 08 May 2016 10:20:40 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.9.8 By: Stick to Your Ribs: Altmetrics — Replacing the Impact Factor Is Not the Only Point | The Scholarly Kitchen https://access.okfn.org/2012/06/22/the-impact-factor-past-its-expiry-date/#comment-557 Fri, 24 Jan 2014 10:51:11 +0000 https://access.okfn.org/?p=528#comment-557 […] the traditional metrics, i.e., the impact factor. Some elements of our industry are trying to break the monopoly that the impact factor has held on metrics in our community so that newer publications might more easily flourish. Perhaps […]

]]>
By: Altmetrics — Replacing the Impact Factor Is Not the Only Point « The Scholarly Kitchen https://access.okfn.org/2012/06/22/the-impact-factor-past-its-expiry-date/#comment-419 Wed, 14 Nov 2012 09:31:19 +0000 https://access.okfn.org/?p=528#comment-419 […] the traditional metrics, i.e., the impact factor. Some elements of our industry are trying to break the monopoly that the impact factor has held on metrics in our community so that newer publications might more easily flourish. Perhaps […]

]]>
By: ☆ The Story of an Article « Mostly physics https://access.okfn.org/2012/06/22/the-impact-factor-past-its-expiry-date/#comment-414 Fri, 05 Oct 2012 04:43:10 +0000 https://access.okfn.org/?p=528#comment-414 […] in the field with an impact factor of 11.4. Although the dismerits of journal impact factors are well-known and widely decried, I won’t be a hypocrite: since my aim is to succeed in the academic rat […]

]]>
By: Tom Olijhoek https://access.okfn.org/2012/06/22/the-impact-factor-past-its-expiry-date/#comment-368 Fri, 22 Jun 2012 13:05:46 +0000 https://access.okfn.org/?p=528#comment-368 Jon, I fully agree with your remarks. A relevance index will not be the ultimate answer, but when you would include a wide cast net of post-pub peer-review this could add to the assessment of a true relevance, the same way that the system for software ranking does. And Yes, an eventual Relevance Index would be a big leap towards a useful metrics, I think

]]>
By: Are High Impact Journals Obsolete? | Planet3.0 https://access.okfn.org/2012/06/22/the-impact-factor-past-its-expiry-date/#comment-367 Fri, 22 Jun 2012 12:53:46 +0000 https://access.okfn.org/?p=528#comment-367 […] Impact Journals Obsolete? Posted on June 22, 2012 by Michael Tobis • 0 CommentsTom Olijhoek notes that Citation rates are still commonly used for the assessment of the quality of individual […]

]]>
By: Jon Tennant https://access.okfn.org/2012/06/22/the-impact-factor-past-its-expiry-date/#comment-366 Fri, 22 Jun 2012 12:30:58 +0000 https://access.okfn.org/?p=528#comment-366 While I fully approve of the RI, and think it’s a step in the right direction, it still appears to me too confined to it’s bibliometric routes.

One of the main arguments for Open Access was that society as a whole deserves to be able to access research with which they have contributed through taxes. When discussing RI, it still appears largely confined to the scholarly communication sphere, and doesn’t take into account social or societal impact, which is an altogether different and much larger realm. I think this is what we need to aim for when assessing the true value and impact of research – how do we measure it’s impact on all facets of society? Altmetrics and the Relevance Index, to me, seem like a great step in the right direction over the anachronistic IF, but there’s still a long way to go yet to develop metrics that assess ‘true’ impact.

I think.

]]>