首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Clinical Practice and Epidemiology in Mental Health : CP EMH >A More Comprehensive Index in the Evaluation of Scientific Research: The Single Researcher Impact Factor Proposal
【2h】

A More Comprehensive Index in the Evaluation of Scientific Research: The Single Researcher Impact Factor Proposal

机译:科学研究评估中更全面的指标:单一研究者影响因子建议

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Good alternatives to the Impact Factor (IF) algorithm are needed. The Thomson IF represents a limited measure of the importance of an individual article because 80% of a journal's IF is determined by only the 20% of the papers published. In the past few years, several new indexes has been created to provide alternatives to the IF algorithm. These include the removal of self citations from the calculation of the IF using the Adjusted IF, Index Copernicus initiative and other modifications such as the Cited Half-Life IF, Median IF, Disciplinary IF, and Prestige Factor. There is also the Euro-Factor, born in Europe to avoid the strong US centrality, and the English language basis of the Thomson database. One possible strategy to avoid "IF supremacy" is to create a new index, the Single Researcher Impact Factor (SRIF), that would move the evaluation from the power of scientific journals to the quality of single researchers. This measure can take into account the number and quality of the traditional publications and other activities usually associated with being a researcher, such as reviewing manuscripts, writing books, and attending scientific meetings. Also, in funding policy, it might be more useful to consider the merits, contributions, and real impact of all the scientific activities of a single researcher instead of adding only the journals' IF numbers. The major aim of this paper is to propose and describe the SRIF index that could represent a novel option to evaluate scientific research and researchers.
机译:需要好的影响因子(IF)算法的替代方案。汤姆森IF表示对某篇文章的重要性的有限衡量标准,因为期刊的IF的80%仅由20%的发表论文确定。在过去的几年中,已经创建了几个新索引来提供IF算法的替代方案。其中包括使用调整后的IF,索引哥白尼倡议和其他修改方法(例如被引半衰期IF,中值IF,学科IF和声望因子)从IF的计算中删除自引用。还有为避免在美国居于中心地位而诞生于欧洲的欧洲因素,以及汤姆森数据库的英语基础。避免“ IF至上”的一种可能策略是创建一个新的索引,即“单一研究人员影响因子”(SRIF),它将使评估从科学期刊的能力转移到单一研究人员的质量。此措施可以考虑到传统出版物的数量和质量以及通常与成为研究人员有关的其他活动,例如审阅手稿,撰写书籍和参加科学会议。同样,在资助政策中,考虑单个研究人员的所有科学活动的优缺点,贡献和实际影响可能会更有用,而不是仅添加期刊的IF编号。本文的主要目的是提出并描述SRIF指数,该指数可能是评估科学研究和研究人员的新选择。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号