"Stunned, Very Confused": Two More Journals Push Back Against Impact Factor Suppression
At least two more journals are fighting decisions by Clarivate — the company behind the Impact Factor — to suppress them from the 2019 list of journals assigned a metric that many rightly or wrongly consider career-making.
RoRI Announces Partners and First Wave of Projects
Following an intense period of consultation and co-design, we are excited to unveil our first wave of projects, which will run for the remainder of RoRI's pilot phase (until autumn 2021). We are also delighted to announce our partners, who will be collaborating in the design and delivery of these projects.
Impact factor volatility due to a single paper: A comprehensive analysis
This publication shows how a single paper affects the impact factor (IF) of a journal by analyzing data from 3,088,511 papers published in 11639 journals in the 2017 Journal Citation Reports of Clarivate Analytics.
Wednesday June 10 has been designated a day of action in STEM and in academia in support of Black lives. Non-Black, non-Indigenous people in STEM and academia are invited to dedicate their working hours to formulating a plan of ACTION for how to join the struggle to ensure that Black lives matter.
Responding to an emerging debate around the changing nature of the impact agenda in the UK, the author argues that the current moment presents an opportunity to exorcise the ghosts of previous regimes of incentivising and assessing impact.
Are Altmetrics Able to Measure Societal Impact in a Similar Way to Peer Review?
Altmetrics have become an increasingly ubiquitous part of scholarly communication, although the value they indicate is contested. A recent study examined the relationship of peer review, altmetrics, and bibliometric analyses with societal and academic impact. Drawing on evidence from REF2014 submissions, it argues altmetrics may provide evidence for wider non-academic debates, but correlate poorly with peer review assessments of societal impact.
Tale of the Converted: How Complex Social Problems Have Made Me Question the Use of Data in Driving Impact
In practice the way in which research impacts and influences policy and society is often thought to be a rational, ordered and linear process. Whilst this might represent a ‘common sense’ understanding of research impact, this post reflects on how upending the primacy of data and embracing complexity can lead to a more nuanced and effective understanding of research impact.
Can We Assess the Wider Effects of Public Engagement?
The extent to which researchers can assess the impact of their public engagement is often under-analysed and limited to success stories. Drawing on the example of development aid, it is argued that we need to widen the parameters for assessing public engagement.
Trust and Mistrust in Americans' Views of Scientific Experts
Public confidence in scientists is on the upswing, and six-in-ten Americans say scientists should play an active role in policy debates about scientific issues, according to a new Pew Research Center survey.
Significant Economic Benefits? Enhancing the Impact of Open Science for Knowledge Users
In this post it is discussed how open research can lead to economic benefits. The author suggests that future open research policies should focus on developing research discovery, translation and the capacity for research utilisation outside of the academy.
Universities Earned Just $75 Million from IP in 2017, but Spent $5.7 Billion on R&D
Canada’s top universities and research institutes spent $5.7 billion on research and development (R&D), but generated less than $75 million from licensing their innovations in 2017. That’s an average return on investment of 1.3 per cent.
Rethinking Impact Factors: New Pathways in Journal Metrics
Diversity, transparency, and reliability are essential principles to ensure that a proliferation of metrics does not distort the scholarly communication system, but leads to more granular and transparent assessments