Re: Impact Factor, Open Access & Other Statistics-Based Quality Models

[J.F.Rowland@lboro.ac.uk]

Impact factors (whether based on ISI databases or any other), calculated
from citations or weblinking, and usage statistics (whther COUNTER-
compliant or not) measure somewhat different things.

Impact factors measure the perceived usefulness of an article - someone
thinks it is worth citing, or worth putting in a web link to.  Usage stats
measure the fact that someone thought it was worth looking at (cursorily
or more), perhaps a rather lower standard of usefulness.

Time will tell which of these measures is regarded as the more meaningful.  
If both parameters could be adequately standardised, it might be
interesting to look at the ratio between the two.  A high "impact factor
per use" would imply that of those who looked at the paper, a large
proportion found it useful enough to cite it.  A low "impact factor per
use" would imply that lots of people looked at it but few cited it - the
sort of fate that might befall one of the less impressive papers from a
well-know author, perhaps?

Fytton Rowland, Loughborough University, UK