Impact factor, H index, peer comparisons, and <it>Retrovirology</it>: is it time to individualize citation metrics?
<p>Abstract</p> <p>There is a natural tendency to judge a gift by the attractiveness of its wrapping. In some respect, this reflects current mores of measuring the gravitas of a scientific paper based on the journal cover in which the work appears. Most journals have an impact fact...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2007-06-01
|
| Series: | Retrovirology |
| Online Access: | http://www.retrovirology.com/content/4/1/42 |
| id |
doaj-d6fe8b15d9c04ea5bd0ca24bd431f9d5 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
Article |
| spelling |
doaj-d6fe8b15d9c04ea5bd0ca24bd431f9d52020-11-24T21:33:53ZengBMCRetrovirology1742-46902007-06-01414210.1186/1742-4690-4-42Impact factor, H index, peer comparisons, and <it>Retrovirology</it>: is it time to individualize citation metrics?Jeang Kuan-Teh<p>Abstract</p> <p>There is a natural tendency to judge a gift by the attractiveness of its wrapping. In some respect, this reflects current mores of measuring the gravitas of a scientific paper based on the journal cover in which the work appears. Most journals have an impact factor (IF) which some proudly display on their face page. Although historically journal IF has been a convenient quantitative shorthand, has its (mis)use contributed to inaccurate perceptions of the quality of scientific articles? Is now the time that equally convenient but more individually accurate metrics be adopted?</p> http://www.retrovirology.com/content/4/1/42 |
| collection |
DOAJ |
| language |
English |
| format |
Article |
| sources |
DOAJ |
| author |
Jeang Kuan-Teh |
| spellingShingle |
Jeang Kuan-Teh Impact factor, H index, peer comparisons, and <it>Retrovirology</it>: is it time to individualize citation metrics? Retrovirology |
| author_facet |
Jeang Kuan-Teh |
| author_sort |
Jeang Kuan-Teh |
| title |
Impact factor, H index, peer comparisons, and <it>Retrovirology</it>: is it time to individualize citation metrics? |
| title_short |
Impact factor, H index, peer comparisons, and <it>Retrovirology</it>: is it time to individualize citation metrics? |
| title_full |
Impact factor, H index, peer comparisons, and <it>Retrovirology</it>: is it time to individualize citation metrics? |
| title_fullStr |
Impact factor, H index, peer comparisons, and <it>Retrovirology</it>: is it time to individualize citation metrics? |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Impact factor, H index, peer comparisons, and <it>Retrovirology</it>: is it time to individualize citation metrics? |
| title_sort |
impact factor, h index, peer comparisons, and <it>retrovirology</it>: is it time to individualize citation metrics? |
| publisher |
BMC |
| series |
Retrovirology |
| issn |
1742-4690 |
| publishDate |
2007-06-01 |
| description |
<p>Abstract</p> <p>There is a natural tendency to judge a gift by the attractiveness of its wrapping. In some respect, this reflects current mores of measuring the gravitas of a scientific paper based on the journal cover in which the work appears. Most journals have an impact factor (IF) which some proudly display on their face page. Although historically journal IF has been a convenient quantitative shorthand, has its (mis)use contributed to inaccurate perceptions of the quality of scientific articles? Is now the time that equally convenient but more individually accurate metrics be adopted?</p> |
| url |
http://www.retrovirology.com/content/4/1/42 |
| work_keys_str_mv |
AT jeangkuanteh impactfactorhindexpeercomparisonsanditretrovirologyitisittimetoindividualizecitationmetrics |
| _version_ |
1725951468526108672 |