• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Current Science: A Fortnightly Journal of Research >'Impact factor' and 'we also ran' syndrome
【24h】

'Impact factor' and 'we also ran' syndrome

机译：'影响因素'和'我们也跑'综合症

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Kochar’s1 comments on the opportunity missed by ISRO scientists to have been the first to report the presence of water on the moon are worth taking note of. This is not the first time that our scientists have lost the opportunity to be recognized as discoverers of something novel and significant. Many of us have experienced that while we keep on struggling to satisfy the apparently unending criticisms of the anonymous reviewers, similar findings get published and we end up claiming ‘we also found’. Although the real reasons for not considering publication of some important findings like the evidence for water on the moon in the pages of Current Science would rest with the authors and ISRO authorities, it is a good guess that our undue obsession with publications in the so-called ‘high impact factor’ journals may have been a major factor. Current Science, though widely circulated in the country and elsewhere (because of full open-access on the internet), continues to have a relatively low impact factor and, therefore, is not preferred by a majority of our established as well as upcoming scientists as a forum for publication of important observations/discoveries. Like Current Science, most of the other research journals published in India are trapped in the vicious circle of poor quality papers resulting in low impact factor and, therefore, a continuing dearth of good quality papers available for publication2. Currently, impact factors, hindices and other similar quantities seem to have become the only yardstick, albeit unjustifiably, to measure the quality of one’s scientific contributions. Given this emphasis, authors do not feel encouraged to submit their manuscript by choice to Current Science or other journals published from India. This is compounded further by the fact that publications in ‘national’ journals are looked down upon by the peers and judges alike. This bias has forced scientists in India, especially the younger generation, to believe that publication of their results in the so-called international journals alone can help them fetch a job or recognition (‘impact-factor syndrome’). The distinction between ‘national’ and ‘international’ journals, as found in most of the application forms for jobs, awards, research grants, etc. is anomalous and defies a logical basis. Do the journals published from within the Indian territory not have international authorship, visibility or recognition?
机译：值得一提的是，科沙尔（Kochar）对ISRO科学家所错过的机会的评论是第一个报告月球上水的存在的机会。这不是我们的科学家第一次没有机会被公认为新颖和重要的发现者。我们中的许多人都经历过，尽管我们一直在努力满足对匿名审稿人的无休止的批评，但类似的发现也得以发表，最终我们宣称“我们也发现了”。尽管不考虑发表某些重要发现的真正原因（例如，《当前科学》页面上的月球上的水的证据）应由作者和ISRO当局承担，但可以很好地猜想我们对这样的出版物有过分的迷恋-所谓的“高影响因子”期刊可能是一个主要因素。当前的《科学》虽然在国内和其他地区广为流传（由于互联网上的完全开放访问），但其影响因子仍然相对较低，因此，我们的大多数既定科学家和即将到来的科学家都不喜欢它。一个发表重要观察/发现的论坛。像《现代科学》一样，在印度出版的大多数其他研究期刊也陷入了质量低劣论文的恶性循环中，从而导致影响因子低，因此持续缺乏可供出版的高质量论文2。目前，影响因素，阻碍因素和其他类似数量似乎已经成为衡量个人科学贡献质量的唯一标准，尽管这是没有道理的。考虑到这一点，作者不鼓励作者选择向《现代科学》或印度出版的其他期刊投稿。 “国家”期刊的出版物受到同行和法官的鄙视，这一事实进一步加剧了这一情况。这种偏见迫使印度，尤其是年轻一代的科学家相信，仅在所谓的国际期刊上发表其研究成果就可以帮助他们取得工作或获得认可（“影响因子综合症”）。在工作，奖励，研究补助金等大多数申请表中，“国家”期刊与“国际”期刊之间的区别是反常的，并没有逻辑上的依据。在印度境内出版的期刊是否没有国际著作权，知名度或认可度？

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号