Response to Correspondence, “`Worshiping False Idols: The Impact Factor Dilemma': Correcting the Record”

I welcome the correspondence by James Pringle of Thomson Reuters regarding my recent editorial in the Journal of Child Neurology. However, it is disappointing that Pringle chose to use typical faulty reasoning by attacking my citing of the article by Rossner et al (which was just 1 of the total 32 references) rather than addressing the real issues raised in my editorial. In addition, Pringle ignored the fact that the arguments made by Pendlebury at the Thomson Scientific Web site have been soundly refuted by Rossner et al. Issues that the various Thomson Scientific spokespersons refuse to address are the arbitrariness of Thomson Scientific’s categorization of journal articles and the ability of editors and journals to manipulate journal impact factor calculations. Despite claiming “pride in the accuracy and transparency” of the Thomson Scientific database, Pringle fails, for example, to explain how (as noted in my editorial) 2 sets of meeting abstracts were categorized in 2005 as articles used in the denominator of the journal impact factor calculations for the Journal of Child Neurology. Pringle also does not address the manipulation of bibliographic categorization “Worshiping False Idols: The Impact Factor Dilemma”: Correcting the Record

[1]  R. Smith.  Beware the tyranny of impact factors. , 2008, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[2]  A report card for journals. , 2003, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[3]  Robert G Maunder,et al.  Using Publication Statistics for Evaluation in Academic Psychiatry , 2007, Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie.

[4]  M. Szklo.  Impact factor: good reasons for concern. , 2008, Epidemiology.

[5]  David L Bartley,et al.  The ups and downs of journal impact factors. , 2008, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[6]  R. Weigel,et al.  Incentive systems for academic productivity in a department of surgery. , 2004, Journal of the American College of Surgeons.

[7]  R. Brumback,et al.  Worshiping False Idols: The Impact Factor Dilemma , 2008, Journal of child neurology.

[8]  Charles Jennings,et al.  Citation Data: The Wrong Impact? * * Reprinted with permission from Nature Neuroscience, 1, December, 1998, 641-643. , 2001, Cortex.

[9]  M. Amin,et al.  Impact factors: use and abuse. , 2003, Medicina.

[10]  Tam Cam Ha,et al.  The journal impact factor: too much of an impact? , 2006, Annals of the Academy of Medicine, Singapore.

[11]  P. Lawrence.  The mismeasurement of science , 2007, Current Biology.

[12]  Matthew E Falagas,et al.  Trends in the impact factor of scientific journals. , 2006, Mayo Clinic proceedings.

[13]  Hannah Brown,et al.  How impact factors changed medical publishing—and science , 2007, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[14]  A A Sandberg,et al.  The journal "impact factor": a misnamed, misleading, misused measure. , 1998, Cancer genetics and cytogenetics.

[15]  Ana Marusic,et al.  Calculating Impact Factor: How Bibliographical Classification of Journal Items Affects the Impact Factor of Large and Small Journals , 2008, Sci. Eng. Ethics.

[16]  A. Agrawal,et al.  Corruption of journal Impact Factors. , 2005, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[17]  David Adam,et al.  Citation analysis: The counting house , 2002, Nature.

[18]  A. Wilcox,et al.  Rise and fall of the Thomson impact factor. , 2008, Epidemiology.

[19]  ALAN E. WILSON,et al.  Journal Impact Factors Are Inflated , 2007 .

[20]  B. Smoller.  Impact factor: certainly a factor, but just whom does it impact? Important lessons from another discipline , 2006, Journal of cutaneous pathology.

[21]  M. Frank.  Impact factors: arbiter of excellence? , 2002, The Physiologist.

[22]  S. Begley.  Science journals artfully try to boost their rankings. , 2006, Wall Street journal.

[23]  D. Colquhoun.  Challenging the tyranny of impact factors , 2003, Nature.

[24]  Emma Hill,et al.  Show me the data. , 1998 .

[25]  R. Monastersky.  The number that's devouring science , 2005 .

[26]  S. Bloch,et al.  Counting on citations: a flawed way to measure quality , 2003, The Medical journal of Australia.

[27]  Juan Miguel Campanario,et al.  Journal self-citations that contribute to the impact factor: Documents labeled “editorial material” in journals covered by the Science Citation Index , 2006, Scientometrics.

[28]  Miguel A Hernán,et al.  Epidemiologists (of all people) should question journal impact factors. , 2008, Epidemiology.

[29]  C. Balaka,et al.  What does impact factor depend upon? , 2007, Journal of B.U.ON. : official journal of the Balkan Union of Oncology.

[30]  Clara Lowy.  Impact factor limits funding , 1997, The Lancet.

[31]  D. Greenwood,et al.  Selective attrition and bias in a longitudinal health survey among survivors of a disaster , 2007, BMC medical research methodology.

[32]  Miquel Porta,et al.  How come scientists uncritically adopt and embody Thomson's bibliographic impact factor? , 2008, Epidemiology.

[33]  Emma Hill,et al.  Irreproducible Results—a Response to Thomson Scientific , 2008, The Journal of general physiology.

[34]  R. Johnston,et al.  On Structuring Subjective Judgements: Originality, Significance and Rigour in RAE2008. , 2008 .

[35]  Klaus Kuhn,et al.  [The journal impact factor as a parameter for the evaluation of researchers and research]. , 2004, Medizinische Klinik.

[36]  Sophie Rovner.  THE IMPORT OF IMPACT , 2008 .

[37]  M. Pfeifer,et al.  The continued use of retracted, invalid scientific literature. , 1990, JAMA.

[38]  Peng Dong,et al.  The "impact factor" revisited , 2005, Biomedical digital libraries.

[39]  T. V. Leeuwen,et al.  Impact factors can mislead , 1996, Nature.

[40]  T. Damer,et al.  Attacking Faulty Reasoning: A Practical Guide to Fallacy-Free Arguments , 1980 .

[41]  N. Mohaghegh,et al.  WHY THE IMPACT FACTOR OF JOURNALS SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR EVALUATING RESEARCH , 2005 .

[42]  Patrick Onghena,et al.  An Assessment of the Predictive Validity of Impact Factor Scores: Implications for Academic Employment Decisions in Social Work , 2006 .

[43]  Not-so-deep impact , 2005, Nature.