Cargando…
A More Comprehensive Index in the Evaluation of Scientific Research: The Single Researcher Impact Factor Proposal
Good alternatives to the Impact Factor (IF) algorithm are needed. The Thomson IF represents a limited measure of the importance of an individual article because 80% of a journal's IF is determined by only the 20% of the papers published. In the past few years, several new indexes has been creat...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Bentham Open
2010
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3040994/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21339895 http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1745017901006010109 |
_version_ | 1782198397883645952 |
---|---|
author | Castelnuovo, Gianluca Limonta, Daniel Sarmiento, Luis Molinari, Enrico |
author_facet | Castelnuovo, Gianluca Limonta, Daniel Sarmiento, Luis Molinari, Enrico |
author_sort | Castelnuovo, Gianluca |
collection | PubMed |
description | Good alternatives to the Impact Factor (IF) algorithm are needed. The Thomson IF represents a limited measure of the importance of an individual article because 80% of a journal's IF is determined by only the 20% of the papers published. In the past few years, several new indexes has been created to provide alternatives to the IF algorithm. These include the removal of self citations from the calculation of the IF using the Adjusted IF, Index Copernicus initiative and other modifications such as the Cited Half-Life IF, Median IF, Disciplinary IF, and Prestige Factor. There is also the Euro-Factor, born in Europe to avoid the strong US centrality, and the English language basis of the Thomson database. One possible strategy to avoid "IF supremacy" is to create a new index, the Single Researcher Impact Factor (SRIF), that would move the evaluation from the power of scientific journals to the quality of single researchers. This measure can take into account the number and quality of the traditional publications and other activities usually associated with being a researcher, such as reviewing manuscripts, writing books, and attending scientific meetings. Also, in funding policy, it might be more useful to consider the merits, contributions, and real impact of all the scientific activities of a single researcher instead of adding only the journals' IF numbers. The major aim of this paper is to propose and describe the SRIF index that could represent a novel option to evaluate scientific research and researchers. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-3040994 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2010 |
publisher | Bentham Open |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-30409942011-02-18 A More Comprehensive Index in the Evaluation of Scientific Research: The Single Researcher Impact Factor Proposal Castelnuovo, Gianluca Limonta, Daniel Sarmiento, Luis Molinari, Enrico Clin Pract Epidemiol Ment Health Article Good alternatives to the Impact Factor (IF) algorithm are needed. The Thomson IF represents a limited measure of the importance of an individual article because 80% of a journal's IF is determined by only the 20% of the papers published. In the past few years, several new indexes has been created to provide alternatives to the IF algorithm. These include the removal of self citations from the calculation of the IF using the Adjusted IF, Index Copernicus initiative and other modifications such as the Cited Half-Life IF, Median IF, Disciplinary IF, and Prestige Factor. There is also the Euro-Factor, born in Europe to avoid the strong US centrality, and the English language basis of the Thomson database. One possible strategy to avoid "IF supremacy" is to create a new index, the Single Researcher Impact Factor (SRIF), that would move the evaluation from the power of scientific journals to the quality of single researchers. This measure can take into account the number and quality of the traditional publications and other activities usually associated with being a researcher, such as reviewing manuscripts, writing books, and attending scientific meetings. Also, in funding policy, it might be more useful to consider the merits, contributions, and real impact of all the scientific activities of a single researcher instead of adding only the journals' IF numbers. The major aim of this paper is to propose and describe the SRIF index that could represent a novel option to evaluate scientific research and researchers. Bentham Open 2010-11-05 /pmc/articles/PMC3040994/ /pubmed/21339895 http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1745017901006010109 Text en © Castelnuovo et al.; Licensee Bentham Open. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This is an open access article licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted, non-commercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Article Castelnuovo, Gianluca Limonta, Daniel Sarmiento, Luis Molinari, Enrico A More Comprehensive Index in the Evaluation of Scientific Research: The Single Researcher Impact Factor Proposal |
title | A More Comprehensive Index in the Evaluation of Scientific Research: The Single Researcher Impact Factor Proposal |
title_full | A More Comprehensive Index in the Evaluation of Scientific Research: The Single Researcher Impact Factor Proposal |
title_fullStr | A More Comprehensive Index in the Evaluation of Scientific Research: The Single Researcher Impact Factor Proposal |
title_full_unstemmed | A More Comprehensive Index in the Evaluation of Scientific Research: The Single Researcher Impact Factor Proposal |
title_short | A More Comprehensive Index in the Evaluation of Scientific Research: The Single Researcher Impact Factor Proposal |
title_sort | more comprehensive index in the evaluation of scientific research: the single researcher impact factor proposal |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3040994/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21339895 http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1745017901006010109 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT castelnuovogianluca amorecomprehensiveindexintheevaluationofscientificresearchthesingleresearcherimpactfactorproposal AT limontadaniel amorecomprehensiveindexintheevaluationofscientificresearchthesingleresearcherimpactfactorproposal AT sarmientoluis amorecomprehensiveindexintheevaluationofscientificresearchthesingleresearcherimpactfactorproposal AT molinarienrico amorecomprehensiveindexintheevaluationofscientificresearchthesingleresearcherimpactfactorproposal AT castelnuovogianluca morecomprehensiveindexintheevaluationofscientificresearchthesingleresearcherimpactfactorproposal AT limontadaniel morecomprehensiveindexintheevaluationofscientificresearchthesingleresearcherimpactfactorproposal AT sarmientoluis morecomprehensiveindexintheevaluationofscientificresearchthesingleresearcherimpactfactorproposal AT molinarienrico morecomprehensiveindexintheevaluationofscientificresearchthesingleresearcherimpactfactorproposal |