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

["Sally Morris \(ALPSP\)" <chief-exec@alpsp.org>]

I'm concerned that there's possibly a built-in distortion here.  Impact
factors (or any other 'qualitative' measures) need to be equally
applicable across the entire literature, both open and closed-access.  
However, both 'big deals' and OA may have an inbuilt distortion factor
which has everything to do with availability and nothing (necessarily) to
do with quality.

Can anyone suggest how we can solve this dilemma?  I'm assuming our aim is
to 'measure' quality, not to skew perceptions in favour of any particular
business model ;-)

Sally Morris, Chief Executive
Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers
South House, The Street, Clapham, Worthing, West Sussex BN13 3UU, UK

Phone:  +44 (0)1903 871686 Fax:  +44 (0)1903 871457
E-mail:  chief-exec@alpsp.org
ALPSP Website  http://www.alpsp.org

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Peter Suber" <peters@earlham.edu>
Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 7:05 AM
Subject: Re: Impact Factor, Open Access & Other Statistics-Based Quality

> In addition to the initiatives that Stevan Harnad mentions below, the Open
> Society Institute has convened a working group to develop an Open Access
> Citation Index.  We've only met once and won't have anything to show for
> quite a while.  We're still brainstorming.  If anyone on the list has
> ideas or suggestions for us, please feel free to send them to Jean-Claude
> Guedon (jean.claude.guedon [at] umontreal.ca) or Melissa Hagemann
> (MHagemann [at] sorosny.org).
>
> The motivation to create the new impact measurement is very much in line
> with Michael Leach's original posting in this thread.
>
> Peter Suber
> peter.suber@earlham.edu