Cameron, N (Cameron, Noel) Impact factors and research quality ANNALS OF HUMAN BIOLOGY, 34 (1): 13-15 JAN-FEB 2007

[Eugene Garfield]

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03014460601153533

E-mail: N.Cameron at lboro.ac.uk

Author(s): Cameron, N (Cameron, Noel) 

Title: Impact factors and research quality 

Source: ANNALS OF HUMAN BIOLOGY, 34 (1): 13-15 JAN-FEB 2007 

Language: English 

Document Type: Editorial Material 

Cited Reference Count: 7 

Times Cited: 0 

Excerpt: It is not surprising given the financial importance of this 
exercise to UK university departments and research organizations, that 
almost all turned to bibliometrics as the objective measure as the quality 
of output.  Those seemingly ubiquitous numbers that 
provide 'impact', 'half life', and 'immediacy indices' appear to dominate 
discussions within editorial boards and publishing houses intent upon 
presiding over the most prestigious journals that most forcefully 
influence international research.  Contrary to popular belief, the science 
of 'bibliometrics' is not new (even though my MS Word UK dictionary does 
not recognize it!) and did not start with Eugene Garfield and his 
Institute of Scientific Information (ISI) in Philadelphia in the 1960s.  
Bibliometrics was conceived in the 1920s with seminal work by Hulme 
(1923), Lotka (1926) and Gross and Gross (1927) and then lay dormant 
until "Science since Babylon" and "Little Science, Big Science" by Derek 
John de Solla Price in 1961 and 1963, respectively.  He advocated the use 
of the Science Citation Index that had originally been developed by 
Garfield at the ISI in 1955.  Using the database at the ISI the Impact 
Factor (IF) became the tool of the quantitative analysis of supposed 
quality in scientific publication. The advent of computers and access to 
large bibliometric databases (Web of Science, Medline, etc.) enhanced the 
use of bibliometrics to gauge the impact of one's own work and those of 
one's peers, collaborators, and competitors in the game of science.  
Bibliometrics is now an accepted and sophisticated science with its own 
research practitioners or bibliometricians.  It also has its target 
consumers in the form of research scientists, research managers, and those 
involved in research policy.

Conclusion: How are originality, rigour, etc. to be assessed by the 
panels?  By 'peer review based on professional judgement' according to the 
documentation (RAE 2008, 2006).  Lead assessors will be identified within 
each panel and two sub-panel members will independently evaluate each 
output and submit their 'quality level scores' (QLS) to the lead member.  
We do not know how those scores will be arrived at, and call me cynical if 
you will, but I will be very surprised if the QLS does not correlate 
highly with journal IF's.

Publisher: TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD 

Publisher Address: 4 PARK SQUARE, MILTON PARK, ABINGDON OX14 4RN, OXON, 
ENGLAND 

ISSN: 0301-4460 

29-char Source Abbrev.: ANN HUM BIOL 

ISO Source Abbrev.: Ann. Hum. Biol. 

Source Item Page Count: 3 

Subject Category: Biology; Public, Environmental & Occupational Health 

ISI Document Delivery No.: 143UM 

*RAE
PAN CRIT WORK METH : 2006 

DESOLLA PD
LITTLE SCI BIG SCI : 1963 

DESOLLA PD
SCI SINCE BABYLON : 1961 

GROSS PLK
SCIENCE 66 : 385 1927 

HULME EW
STAT BIBLIOGRAPHY RE : 1923 

LOTKA AJ
J WASHINGTON ACADEMY 16 : 317 1926 

MONASTERSKY R
NUMBER DEVOURING SCI 52 : A12 2005