[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Open access and impact factors ( was: Open access and the ALA)

Bernie, this is fascinating, and points to what I hope is another aspect
of the debate in regards to the changes needed in scholarly

Peer review is only one way of determining the quality and impact of an

Shakespearian academic folks around the world, for example, have their
work evaluated through peer review.  But could anyone argue that there is
a single peer-reviewed item in this discipline that matches the quality
and impact of the works of Shakespeare - who, I suspect, never heard of
peer review?

Bernie - or anyone - do you have any suggestions as to how those of us who
don't read quite as much as you appear to, might go about gathering a
personal citation index.


Heather Morrison

liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu writes:
>In the posting below, Becky Smith notes:
>"If open access means little or no impact in ISI, then there is an
>opportunity as a profession (or another scientific scholarly organization)
>to create its own impact index..."
>I realize that this doesn't have a lot to do with Rick Anderson's original
>posting, but I have experimented a bit with personal impact factors beyond
>those one might find in the ISI citation indices. And perhaps my
>investigations might be relevant to determining the impact of open access
>Here's one example of some work I did on what I call a "personal citation
>index" (this example relates to a paper that appeared in Library Trends):
>Interestingly, my "personal citation index" concept has been cited in
>several scholarly papers. The "interesting" thing about this is that my
>report on my research in this area has been self-published on the Web.
>This is completely non-peer-reviewed, i.e., the ultimate in open access
>publication. See the following for some comments on this phenomenon:
>I welcome comments....
>Bernie Sloan