Impacted Science: Impact Is Not Importance

ABSTRACT The journal impact factor (IF) exerts a tremendous influence on the conduct of scientists. The obsession with IF has been compared to a medical condition, sometimes referred to as “IF mania” or “impactitis.” Here, we analyze the difference between impact and importance, using examples from...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Arturo Casadevall, Ferric C. Fang
Formato: article
Lenguaje:EN
Publicado: American Society for Microbiology 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://doaj.org/article/f253c4390e3d48b7ab284e43d6686844
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
id oai:doaj.org-article:f253c4390e3d48b7ab284e43d6686844
record_format dspace
spelling oai:doaj.org-article:f253c4390e3d48b7ab284e43d66868442021-11-15T15:41:31ZImpacted Science: Impact Is Not Importance10.1128/mBio.01593-152150-7511https://doaj.org/article/f253c4390e3d48b7ab284e43d66868442015-10-01T00:00:00Zhttps://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/mBio.01593-15https://doaj.org/toc/2150-7511ABSTRACT The journal impact factor (IF) exerts a tremendous influence on the conduct of scientists. The obsession with IF has been compared to a medical condition, sometimes referred to as “IF mania” or “impactitis.” Here, we analyze the difference between impact and importance, using examples from the history of science to show that these are not equivalent. If impact does not necessarily equal importance, but scientists are focused on high-impact work, there is a danger that misuse of the IF may adversely affect scientific progress. We suggest five measures to fight this malady: (i) diversify journal club selections, (ii) do not judge science on the publication venue, (iii) reduce the reliance on journal citation metrics for employment and advancement, (iv) discuss the misuse of the IF in ethics courses, and (v) cite the most appropriate sources. If IF mania is indeed a medical condition, the most appropriate course of action may be disimpaction.Arturo CasadevallFerric C. FangAmerican Society for MicrobiologyarticleMicrobiologyQR1-502ENmBio, Vol 6, Iss 5 (2015)
institution DOAJ
collection DOAJ
language EN
topic Microbiology
QR1-502
spellingShingle Microbiology
QR1-502
Arturo Casadevall
Ferric C. Fang
Impacted Science: Impact Is Not Importance
description ABSTRACT The journal impact factor (IF) exerts a tremendous influence on the conduct of scientists. The obsession with IF has been compared to a medical condition, sometimes referred to as “IF mania” or “impactitis.” Here, we analyze the difference between impact and importance, using examples from the history of science to show that these are not equivalent. If impact does not necessarily equal importance, but scientists are focused on high-impact work, there is a danger that misuse of the IF may adversely affect scientific progress. We suggest five measures to fight this malady: (i) diversify journal club selections, (ii) do not judge science on the publication venue, (iii) reduce the reliance on journal citation metrics for employment and advancement, (iv) discuss the misuse of the IF in ethics courses, and (v) cite the most appropriate sources. If IF mania is indeed a medical condition, the most appropriate course of action may be disimpaction.
format article
author Arturo Casadevall
Ferric C. Fang
author_facet Arturo Casadevall
Ferric C. Fang
author_sort Arturo Casadevall
title Impacted Science: Impact Is Not Importance
title_short Impacted Science: Impact Is Not Importance
title_full Impacted Science: Impact Is Not Importance
title_fullStr Impacted Science: Impact Is Not Importance
title_full_unstemmed Impacted Science: Impact Is Not Importance
title_sort impacted science: impact is not importance
publisher American Society for Microbiology
publishDate 2015
url https://doaj.org/article/f253c4390e3d48b7ab284e43d6686844
work_keys_str_mv AT arturocasadevall impactedscienceimpactisnotimportance
AT ferriccfang impactedscienceimpactisnotimportance
_version_ 1718427740607086592