BMJ  2008;336:789 (12 April), doi:10.1136/bmj.39542.514745.3A

Letters

Ditching impact factors

Time for the single researcher impact factor

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

It is indeed time to consider alternatives for the "impact factor" algorithm.¹ For example, it might be more useful to consider the merits and contributions of all the scientific activities of each single researcher instead of measuring only the impact factor numbers. For example, as reported in a recent debate in Science about peer reviewers’ responsibilities,² writing and finalising an article is a complex process in which reviewers offer a crucial scientific contribution. One possible solution is to create a new index, the single researcher impact factor, which can take into account the number and quality of traditional publications and other activities such as reviewing manuscripts.

Some experimental versions of this new index are under evaluation. The single researcher centred impact factor will ensure that the evaluation of individual scientific impact in the community will be more accurate and could better motivate researchers to review (without frustration), publish, and share . . . [Full text of this article]

¹ Istituto Auxologico Italiano IRCCS, Psychology Research Laboratory and Catholic University of Milan, Milan, Italy

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    StumbleUpon    Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Article

Should we ditch impact factors?

Richard Hobbs
BMJ 2007 334: 569. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Rapid Responses:

Read all Rapid Responses

Single Researcher Impact Factor

Andrzej Grzybowski
bmj.com, 4 Oct 2008 [Full text]

Online poll

Find out more >>