Comments on a critique of the Thomson Reuters journal impact factor

@article{Pendlebury2012CommentsOA,
  title={Comments on a critique of the Thomson Reuters journal impact factor},
  author={D. Pendlebury and Jonathan Adams},
  journal={Scientometrics},
  year={2012},
  volume={92},
  pages={395-401}
}
We discuss research evaluation, the nature of impact, and the use of the Thomson Reuters journal impact factor and other indicators in scientometrics in the light of recent commentary. 

Topics from this paper

A bibliometric profile of Current Science
Impact factor: Imperfect but not yet replaceable
  • S. Brody
  • Economics, Computer Science
  • Scientometrics
  • 2012
Use of the journal impact factor for assessing individual articles need not be wrong
Use of the journal impact factor for assessing individual articles need not be statistically wrong.
...
1
2
3
4
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 54 REFERENCES
Casting a wide net: the Journal Impact Factor numerator
The Thomson Reuters Journal Selection Process
The use and misuse of journal metrics and other citation indicators
  • D. Pendlebury
  • Psychology, Medicine
  • Archivum Immunologiae et Therapiae Experimentalis
  • 2009
Citation analysis: The counting house
  • D. Adam
  • Computer Science, Medicine
  • Nature
  • 2002
An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output
  • J. E. Hirsch
  • Physics, Computer Science
  • Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
  • 2005
Significant journals of science
Citation indexes for science; a new dimension in documentation through association of ideas.
Citation indexes for science. A new dimension in documentation through association of ideas. 1955.
  • E. Garfield
  • Sociology, Medicine
  • International journal of epidemiology
  • 2006
...
1
2
3
4
5
...