Impact Factor Debate

Use of impact factor as an assessment method for determining the quality of journals raises a variety of questions and concerns. Though it is possible to assess research on the basis of the number of times that a published work is cited or the number times a journal is cited, this quantitative measure is not without controversy. Though most would agree that impact factor is a useful critereon, many believe that it should not be used as a unique indicator of quality, nor should it replace the more informal methods of peer recognition traditionally used by the scholarly community. Following are links to articles available on the Internet which provide a flavor of this ongoing debate.

Amin, M. & M. Mabe. Impact Factors: Use and abuse. Perspectives in Publishing, October 2000, No. 1: 1-6. http://www.ntu.edu.sg/home/mwtang/ifuse.pdf

Lundberg, George. The "omnipotent" Science Citation Index Impact Factor. MJA 2003, 178(6): 253-254. http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/178_06_170303/editorials_170303-2.html

Saha, Somnath, Saint Sajay, & Dimitri A. Christakis. Impact factor: a valid measure of journal quality? Journal of the Medical Library Association. 2003 January; 91 (1): 42–46. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=141186

Trayhurn, Paul, Editiorial. Citations and 'impact factor' - the Holy Grail. British Journal of Nutrition, July 2002, 88(1): 1-2. http://www.nutritionsociety.org.uk/bjn/088/bjn0880001.htm