An investigation into diabetes researcher's perceptions of the Journal Impact Factor - reconsidering evaluating research
An investigation into diabetes researcher's perceptions of the Journal Impact Factor - reconsidering evaluating research
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s11192-007-1924-4
复制
发表时间：
2008-08-01
期刊：
影响因子：
3.9
通讯作者：
Sonderstrup-Andersen, Hans H. K.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Sonderstrup-Andersen, Eva M.;Sonderstrup-Andersen, Hans H. K.
目前，《期刊影响因子》(JIF)作为评估机构内部和机构间研究质量的组成部分，受到了相当大的关注。本文通过问卷调查的方式，研究了期刊全文数据库的出版行为、研究者获取新知识信息的偏好以及期刊全文数据库对这些变量的可能影响。54名活跃在糖尿病研究领域的丹麦医学研究人员参加了会议。我们要求研究人员根据他们更喜欢哪些期刊来发表研究和获得新知识，对一系列科学期刊进行优先排序。此外，我们要求研究人员指出优先期刊的JIF是否对这些决定有任何影响。此外，我们还探讨了研究人员对JIF在多大程度上可以被认为是确定期刊科学质量的可靠、稳定或客观的衡量标准的看法。此外，我们要求研究人员判断JIF作为进行研究评估的衡量标准的适用性。一个值得注意的结果是这款应用程序。80%的研究人员认为，JIF确实对他们倾向于出版哪些期刊有影响。因此，我们发现研究人员如何对期刊进行排名与排名期刊的JIF之间存在统计上的显着相关性。另一个值得注意的结果是，根据JIF的衡量，研究人员实际上已经发表论文的期刊与他们希望未来发表论文的期刊之间没有显著的相关性。这可以作为对研究人员发表行为的实际动机影响的一个指标。也就是说，影响因子在我们的情况下实际上是有效的。研究人员似乎发现，使用《期刊影响因子》进行研究评估是公平和可靠的。
Currently the Journal Impact Factors (JIF) attracts considerable attention as components in the evaluation of the quality of research in and between institutions. This paper reports on a questionnaire study of the publishing behaviour and researchers preferences for seeking new knowledge information and the possible influence of JIF on these variables. 54 Danish medical researchers active in the field of Diabetes research took part. We asked the researchers to prioritise a series of scientific journals with respect to which journals they prefer for publishing research and gaining new knowledge. In addition we requested the researchers to indicate whether or not the JIF of the prioritised journals has had any influence on these decisions. Furthermore we explored the perception of the researchers as to what degree the JIF could be considered a reliable, stable or objective measure for determining the scientific quality of journals. Moreover we asked the researchers to judge the applicability of JIF as a measure for doing research evaluations. One remarkable result is that app. 80% of the researchers share the opinion that JIF does indeed have an influence on which journals they would prefer for publishing. As such we found a statistically significant correlation between how the researchers ranked the journals and the JIF of the ranked journals. Another notable result is that no significant correlation exists between journals where the researchers actually have published papers and journals in which they would prefer to publish in the future measured by JIF. This could be taken as an indicator for the actual motivational influence on the publication behaviour of the researchers. That is, the impact factor actually works in our case. It seems that the researchers find it fair and reliable to use the Journal Impact Factor for research evaluation purposes.