Nothing wrong with the impact factor as long as it isn't a hindrance to free and timely flow of scientific research results, I should think.
-
-
Replying to @Villavelius
@o_guest Other than its complete inability to describe an article's value, and then used to measure the value of a researcher?2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @froggleston @Villavelius
this is as true for altmetrics too tho no?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @Villavelius
No means perfect, but attempt to measure the article. IF is a journal fudge based on cherry picked data you never see
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @froggleston @Villavelius
100% I accept but think it can be just as biased, eg sexist racist, high for reasons not scientific. And...
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @Villavelius
Sure, not advocating altmetrics as whole solution. I'm still definitely advocating that JIF is the problem though ;)
2 replies 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @froggleston @o_guest
Not saying it isn't a problem, but irrelevant to science communication if you always post a preprint anyway.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
but altmetrics can also be biased, based on who is twitter famous etc. This is not just a function of sci merit!
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.