A similar phenomenon could occur with books if a publisher's
reputation plummets, or a publisher once well known for its list in a
certain field abandons that concentration. I think the latter
probably occurs more frequently than the firmer. I know of no studies
of this phenomenon either, however.
Sandy Thatcher
At 8:32 AM +0100 10/9/16, Danny Kingsley wrote:
Hi all,
This is a question that comes up every now and then with researchers.
You spend all your career publishing in the 'Journal of X' because
it is the fancy-pants journal of your discipline. The citations to
your work in Journal of X are also part of your reputation. Then
something happens - the journal loses reputation, or is closed down,
or another journal becomes more influential (the Glossa example
comes to mind) and suddenly the 'Journal of X' is not considered the
top journal any more because 'Journal of Y' is. What happens to your
reputation?
I get the argument that 'it shouldn't matter because the emphasis
should be on the quality of the paper' - but many (many, many)
researchers have impact factor deeply embedded in their psyche.
I don't know if there are any case studies or writings on this issue
that anyone can point me to?
Thanks in advance for help.
Danny
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk <mailto:da...@cam.ac.uk>
T: @dannykay68
B: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/>
S: http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley
<http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley>
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-3636-5939
Hi all,
This is a question that comes up every now and then with researchers.
You spend all your career publishing in the 'Journal of X' because
it is the fancy-pants journal of your discipline. The citations to
your work in Journal of X are also part of your reputation. Then
something happens - the journal loses reputation, or is closed down,
or another journal becomes more influential (the Glossa example
comes to mind) and suddenly the 'Journal of X' is not considered the
top journal any more because 'Journal of Y' is. What happens to your
reputation?
I get the argument that 'it shouldn't matter because the emphasis
should be on the quality of the paper' - but many (many, many)
researchers have impact factor deeply embedded in their psyche.
I don't know if there are any case studies or writings on this issue
that anyone can point me to?
Thanks in advance for help.
Danny
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: <mailto:da...@cam.ac.uk>da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
B:
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/>https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/
S:
<http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley>http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-3636-5939
--
Sanford G. Thatcher
Frisco, TX 75034-5514
https://scholarsphere.psu.edu
"If a book is worth reading, it is worth buying."-John Ruskin (1865)
"The reason why so few good books are written is that so few people
who can write know anything."-Walter Bagehot (1853)
"Logic, n. The art of thinking and reasoning in strict accordance
with the limitations and incapacities of the human
misunderstanding."-Ambrose Bierce (1906)
_______________________________________________
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
