Bibliometrics, what next? Perspective of a journal editor

Gianluca Setti
Professor, University of Ferrara (ENDIF)

Play (22min)

Download: MP4 | MP3

Aim of this talk is to provide a comparative overview of the main features of several journal bibliometric indicators which have been proposed in the last few decades. Their pros and cons are highlighted and compared with the features of the Impact Factor (IF), e.g. the indicator which journal editors have considered so far as the “golden standard”, to show how alternative metrics are specifically designed to address IF flaws. We also report the results of recent studies in the bibliometric literature showing how the scientific impact of journals as evaluated by bibliometrics is a very complicated matter and it is completely unrealistic to try to capture it by any single indicator. As such, we conclude that the adoption of more metrics, with complementary features, to assess journal quality would be very beneficial since it would both offer a more comprehensive and balanced view of each journal in the space of scholarly publications, as well as contribute to eliminate the pressure on individuals and their incentive to do metric manipulation.

You may also like:

  1. Results from global journal editor survey on detecting plagiarism
  2. Developing usage as a new metric: progress on the Journal Usage Factor
  3. Headline Speaker: The First Year Journey of a New Journal Editor
  4. Meet Tim: The Professor and Journal Editor
  5. A new metric for journal impact: Usage Factor

  • Share
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading ... Loading ...