Re: [ECOLOG-L] Universal Impact factor, alternative to Journal Citation Reports

2013-08-26 Thread malcolm McCallum
Whenever people start discussing impact factors, I like to call to their attention this paper from Current Biology that was written by Peter Lawrence of Cambridge. PA Lawrence, the mismeasurement of science http://making-of-a-fly.me/files/pdf/mism_science.pdf I have included an excerpt here: "Answe

Re: [ECOLOG-L] Universal Impact factor, alternative to Journal Citation Reports

2013-08-26 Thread malcolm McCallum
Cool paper! Yes, I agree with you, but that is what the majority of the world uses so we are kind of stuck. Here is a paper I did that compared herpetologists directly: http://www.herpetologynotes.seh-herpetology.org/Volume3_PDFs/McCallum_Herpetology_Notes_Volume3_pages239-245.pdf Here is a ve

Re: [ECOLOG-L] Universal Impact factor, alternative to Journal Citation Reports

2013-08-26 Thread Daniel Hocking
Calculating an impact factor from a larger database satisfies one of the smallest problems with the impact factor. I think it's already been done for the Scopus database for some journals. It is still a bit absurd to draw too much inference based solely from the mean of a highly non-normal distribu

[ECOLOG-L] Universal Impact factor, alternative to Journal Citation Reports

2013-08-25 Thread malcolm McCallum
I am posting this to inform all journal editors/producers that a new alternate organization is producing an impact factor. My understanding is that they are using the same formula as Thomson-Reuters but they are including a much much wider set of journals. Essentially, they are trying to use all