Agrawal AA "Corruption of journal Impact Factors" Trends in Ecology and Evolution 20(4):157, April 2005.

[Quentin L. Burrell]

Gene

Thanks for this.

I was particularly interested in the start of the second sentence of the
Editor's Note: "Beyond pointing authors in the direction of papers that they
might have
missed and would improve the quality of their articles...."

Are editors taking over the role of referees? And what advice are these
editors including in their "Instructions to referees"? Or maybe these
journals do not have referees, only editors!

Quentin

Dr Quentin L Burrell
Isle of Man International Business School
The Nunnery
Old Castletown Road
Douglas
Isle of Man IM9 4EX
via United Kingdom

www.ibs.ac.im


----- Original Message -----
From: "Eugene Garfield" <garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU>
To: <SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2005 5:43 PM
Subject: [SIGMETRICS] Agrawal AA "Corruption of journal Impact Factors"
Trends in Ecology and Evolution 20(4):157, April 2005.



reproduced with permission from the author

Letters
11 February 2005.

TITLE : Corruption of journal Impact Factors
SOURCE: Trends in Ecology and Evolution 20(4):157, April 2005


AUTHOR: Anurag A. Agrawal
E-mail :aa337 at cornell.edu

Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Cornell University, Corson
Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA

SOURCE : Trends in Ecology and Evolution 20(4):157, April 2005


FULL TEXT FOLLOWS :

Letters

Corruption of journal Impact Factors


Anurag A. Agrawal E-mail The Corresponding Author <mailto:aa337 at cornell.edu>

Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Cornell University, Corson
Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA



Scientists and academic institutions widely use Impact Factors
(http://wos.mimas.ac.uk/)  to evaluate the relative importance of journals.
Although sometimes considered controversial, publishing in relatively high
Impact Factor journals has been broadly applied as a stamp of approval for
hiring and promotions, to rate the accomplishments of academic departments,
and the importance of particular disciplines. Both authors and publishers
strive to publish high impact journal articles, and the pressure to do so
has apparently lead to an insidious abuse in how some publishers correspond
with authors of nearly accepted manuscripts. At or before the time of
acceptance, several journals' editors are requesting that authors cite
additional papers published in that same journal. Some of these requests are
general such as 'We would also appreciate it if you would consider citing
relevant past papers [from our journal] in your manuscript', whereas others
are more specific, with journal editors indicating one to several recent
(often unpublished) citations.

Although the extent of this practice is unknown, at least four major
journals in the area of ecology and evolutionary biology routinely encourage
such self citation. Because Impact Factors are calculated by dividing the
number of citations in the current year (e.g. in 2004) to articles published
in the two previous years (i.e. in 2003 and 2002) by the total number of
articles published in the two previous years (i.e. in 2003 and 2002),
citation of articles relatively hot off the press will increase the Impact
Factor of a journal.

A gentle nudge by an editor to cite additional papers if relevant is all too
easy to be uncritically accepted by most authors who are simply overjoyed
with the news that their paper has been accepted. To maintain the integrity
of objective scientific research, this questionable policy that essentially
results in the 'businessification' of science must be stopped. Publishers
should be embarrassed and authors should not comply.


Editor's Note
Requiring authors to cite articles from the same journal in which they hope
to publish is a practice that the Editors of all Trends journals disapprove
of. Beyond pointing authors in the direction of papers that they might have
missed and would improve the quality of their articles, we do not require
authors to cite articles from our journals.