tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3164804243040726299.post1677400106584656941..comments2024-03-19T06:40:22.220-04:00Comments on The EEB & Flow: The end of the impact factorMarc Cadottehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08335319636148357534noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3164804243040726299.post-7051386159636775212013-05-21T14:48:49.517-04:002013-05-21T14:48:49.517-04:00I agree with many things in this post, but I feel ...I agree with many things in this post, but I feel I have to contest the idea that the peer-review system is overloaded. The tragedy of the commons paper makes a number of verbal arguments on why the review system might be overloaded, but it doesn't contain any empirical evidence that it's true. <br /><br />Since a peer review system in danger of imminent collapse would be a major problem, I tried to test this with data from Molecular Ecology (where I work). The paper itself is here: http://bit.ly/hwKoJe (apologies for the firewall). The main result is that submissions to Mol Ecol doubled between 2001 and 2010, but the number of unique reviewers we used in that period increased to keep track (http://www.molecularecologist.com/naturefigs/). If the system was getting overloaded, the line would asymptote as we were forced to go back to the same reviewers again and again. Of course, this isn't definitive proof that the system isn't overloaded elsewhere, but still I think the crisis rhetoric should be tempered: one of the few relevant studies does not match the current narrative. <br /><br />For what it's worth, I've also written a blog post (http://bit.ly/wE1HAn) discussing why senior academics might be more inclined to feel that the system is overburdened, as they get an order of magnitude more review requests than less prominent researchers.<br /><br />Apologies for the self citations...<br /><br />Tim VinesTim Vinesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3164804243040726299.post-50214902053189235472013-05-21T06:11:30.902-04:002013-05-21T06:11:30.902-04:00Hi Devin, I think that there will be a culture shi...Hi Devin, I think that there will be a culture shift, to one where those other impacts have a place. NSF is kind of there already with their strong emphasis on borader impacts.Marc Cadottehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08335319636148357534noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3164804243040726299.post-52835859150494242082013-05-21T06:09:53.201-04:002013-05-21T06:09:53.201-04:00No I hadn't but I'm looking in to it now!No I hadn't but I'm looking in to it now!Marc Cadottehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08335319636148357534noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3164804243040726299.post-64772703485021572892013-05-20T11:12:37.693-04:002013-05-20T11:12:37.693-04:00It's really encouraging and interesting that J...It's really encouraging and interesting that J. App. Eco. places so much value on the "non-academic" use of their articles. It would be ideal if the importance of those articles could somehow be incorporated into grant apps, tenure packets, etc. In my field (systematics) dichotomous keys, systematic/taxonomic revisions and (to a lesser degree) phylogenies are often published in journals with low IF's and are rarely cited. But these have an enormous importance; they are essential for nearly any organismal biologist and used on a daily basis by managers, etc. We need a way to communicate the "impact" of these types of work to administrators and granting agencies. Devinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06596258809549513828noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3164804243040726299.post-74422138707488156032013-05-20T10:51:16.331-04:002013-05-20T10:51:16.331-04:00Hi Marc,
Have you heard of Impact Story.? http:/...Hi Marc, <br /><br />Have you heard of Impact Story.? http://impactstory.org/ <br />They try to develop article-level stats, and they include broader impact, eg on social networks. <br /><br />[disclaimer: I personally know one of the founders].<br /><br />Flonoreply@blogger.com