The Impact Factor Fallacy – New publication at Frontiers in Psychology

Scientists receive grants, bonuses, and tenure depending on the perceived impact of the journals in which they publish their research. Using the journal impact factor (JIF) for such purposes results in reasoning and argumentation fallacies. In our new publication we describe several “impact factor fallacies” by applying ideas from reasoning and argumentation research. We argue that using the JIF in policy and decision making in academia is based on false beliefs and unwarranted inferences and outline why we think that the world of scientific publishing is more complex than can be expressed with a two-digit number.

Link to the article at Frontiers in Psychology:

Coverage of the topic by The Scientist:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s