We analyzed how often and in what ways the Journal Impact Factor (JIF) is currently used in review, promotion, and tenure (RPT) documents of a representative sample of universities from the United States and Canada. 40% of research-intensive institutions and 18% of master's institutions mentioned the JIF, or closely related terms. Of the institutions that mentioned the JIF, 87% supported its use in at least one of their RPT documents, 13% expressed caution about its use, and none heavily criticized it or prohibited its use. Furthermore, 63% of institutions that mentioned the JIF associated the metric with quality, 40% with impact, importance, or significance, and 20% with prestige, reputation, or status. We conclude that use of the JIF is encouraged in RPT evaluations, especially at research-intensive universities, and that there is work to be done to avoid the potential misuse of metrics like the JIF.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6668985PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.47338DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

institutions mentioned
12
mentioned jif
12
journal impact
8
impact factor
8
review promotion
8
promotion tenure
8
rpt documents
8
jif
6
factor academic
4
academic review
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!