Update with a comment.

Don't throw in the towel. First, reform research #assessment to move away from journal impact factors (#JIFs) and to pay more attention to the quality of research than the number of publications or where they published. Second, move away from #APCs. To make research #OpenAccess, favor no-APC #GreenOA and #DiamondOA over APC-based varieties.

BTW, the Budapest Open Access Initiative 20th anniversary statement makes both these recommendations. (Disclosure: I was a co-author.)
https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/boai20/

#BOAI #BOAI20

Tired: Gaming journal impact factors (#JIFs).

Wired: Gaming journal quality factors (#JQFs), quality scores assigned by #ChatGPT.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.09984

#Academia #AI #LLM #ScholComm
@academicchatter

Update. Here's a piece by the senior publisher at @ioppublishing (#IOPP) trying to entice authors to look beyond journal impact factors (#JIFs) when choosing a publisher. It pushes #OpenAccess as an important factor to consider. So far, so good. It mentions high #APCs as a potential barrier, but points to #waivers in mitigation. (IOPP offers waivers.) It never mentions #DiamondOA. (IOPP doesn't offer no-fee OA journals.) And of course it never mentions #GreenOA.
https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20240726092407654

Update. These researchers built an #AI system to predict #REF #assessment scores from a range of data points, inc #citation rates. For individual works, the system was not very accurate. But for total institutional scores, it was 99.8%. "Despite this, we are not recommending this solution because in our judgement, its benefits are marginally outweighed by the perverse incentive it would generate for institutions to overvalue journal impact factors."
https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2023/01/16/can-artificial-intelligence-assess-the-quality-of-academic-journal-articles-in-the-next-ref/

#DORA #JIFs #Metrics

#Clarivate has modified journal impact factors (#JIFs) in response to an "increase in both the quantity & sophistication of fraudulent behaviors."
https://clarivate.com/blog/2024-journal-citation-reports-changes-in-journal-impact-factor-category-rankings-to-enhance-transparency-and-inclusivity

It's now cultivating the false & invidious impression that journals w/o JIFs are somehow untrustworthy or fraudulent.

"We have evolved the JIF from an indicator of scholarly impact (the numerical value of the JIF)…to an indicator of both…impact & trustworthiness (having a JIF – regardless of the number)."

#Metrics #ScholComm

New study: "We find that the number of papers cited at least as well as those appearing in high-impact factor journals vastly exceeds the number of papers published in such venues…We also find that approximately half of researchers never publish in a venue with an impact factor above 15,…raising the possibility that [assessments based on journal impact factors, #JIFs] may recognize as little as 10-20% of the work that warrants recognition."
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2023.09.07.556750v1

#Citations #Impact #Metrics

New study: In the field of dentistry, journals with faster turn-around times tend to have higher impact factors (#JIFs).
https://www.cureus.com/articles/113879-publication-times-and-impact-factors-ifs-in-dentistry-journals

PS: You won't be surprised that a study of dentistry journals and impact factors would introduce the concept of "higher impacted journals".