Re: WSJ in impact factor

[Peter Banks <pbanks@bankspub.com>]

I would not be so quick to abandon the impact factor, though the=20
number of page views is certainly also a useful and meaningful=20
statistic.

I found that there often was little correlation between the two=20
measures. Impact factor measured influence on the development of=20
scientific ideas; page views measured raw readership. It is like=20
the difference between People Magazine (widely read, not=20
influential) and the New Yorker (influential, not widely read).

Besides, if the goal is to avoid become fodder for the na=EFve and=20
hyper-aggressive reporters of the WSJ, the page view is as easily=20
manipulated as the impact factor. Dishonest publishers will find=20
ways to game the system, whatever the system is. At some point we=20
cannot escape the need to rely on integrity and honesty.


On 6/7/06 6:01 PM, "mccannj@musc.edu" <mccannj@musc.edu> wrote:

> Probably unnecessary for readers of this list, but for those who
> want a better understanding of "page view" there is a very simple
> definition at:
>
> <http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/P/page_view.html>
>
> and more technical definitions of hits, visits, visitors, and page views =
at:
>
> <http://www.opentracker.net/en/articles/hits-visitors-pageviews.jsp>
>
> Jett McCann, MLS DM/AHIP
> Assistant Director / Resources Management Services
> Medical University of South Carolina Libraries
> Charleston SC 29425
> mccannj@musc.edu
---2071850956-573178897-1149810628=:7013--