3 ms·
More specifically, Elsevier has high impact factor journals. Somebody had the shitty idea to "rate" scientists "objectively" using some naive version of PageRan
by ahartmetz 9y ago
More specifically, Elsevier has high impact factor journals. Somebody had the shitty idea to "rate" scientists "objectively" using some naive version of PageRank (rank = impact factor). Scientists, being scientists, aren't stupid and invented the equivalent of SEO, only there is no Google to tweak the algorithm in response to SEO-spam. Spamming publications of just acceptable quality for high impact factor journals is now a winning strategy for getting tenure, grants etc. Happy sciencing.
- FabHK 9y agoThough Elsevier's hold onto the prestige/impact factor is tenuous, as shown by several mass resignations of editorial boards that subsequently established competing journals that effectively "took over". (Journal of Algorithms -> ACM Transactions on Algorithms, Topology -> Journal of Topology, etc.)
- Vinnl 9y agoIt's worse, actually: a large publisher (Thomson Reuters) had the idea to rate journals to help librarians pick which to subscribe to, which evolved to people using that to rate academics as well, which was even less justified. I've written about it in more detail at https://medium.com/flockademic/the-ridiculous-number-that-can-make-or-break-academic-careers-704e00ae070a https://medium.com/flockademic/the-ridiculous-number-that-ca...