Andrea Polonioli
University of Edinburgh (PhD)
De Marchi and Lorenzetti :253-261, 2016) have recently argued that in fields where the journal impact factor is not calculated, such as in the humanities, it is key to find other indicators that would allow the relevant community to assess the quality of scholarly journals and the research outputs that are published in them. The authors' suggestion is that information concerning the journal's rejection rate and the number of subscriptions sold is important and should be used for such assessment. The question addressed by the authors is very important, yet their proposed solutions are problematic. Here I point to some of these problems and illustrate them by considering as a case in point the field of philosophy. Specifically, here I argue for four main claims. First, even assuming that IF provides a reliable indicator of the quality of journals for the assessment of research outputs, De Marchi and Lorenzetti have failed to validate their suggested indicators and proxies. Second, it has not been clarified why, in absence of IF, other journal-based metrics that are currently available should not be used. Third, the relationship between IF and rejection rate is more complex than the authors suggest. Fourth, accepting the number of sold subscriptions as a proxy would result in discrimination against open access journals. The upshot of my analysis is that the question of how to assess journals and research outputs in the humanities is still far from resolved.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 70,214
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Fake Journals: Not Always Valid Ways to Distinguish Them.Khaled Moustafa - 2015 - Science and Engineering Ethics 21 (5):1391-1392.
Ethics of Field Research: Do Journals Set the Standard?Helene Marsh & Carole M. Eros - 1999 - Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (3):375-382.
Use and Misuse of Metrics in Research Evaluation.Ronald N. Kostoff - 1997 - Science and Engineering Ethics 3 (2):109-120.
Medical Journals and Conflicts of Interest.Robert Steinbrook & Bernard Lo - 2012 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 40 (3):488-499.
What’s Behind the Hyphen? A Response to Publish Yet Perish.Herner Saeverot - 2014 - Studies in Philosophy and Education 33 (6):673-677.
Journals of Semiotics in the World.Kalevi Kull & Timo Maran - 2013 - Sign Systems Studies 41 (1):140-145.


Added to PP index

Total views
19 ( #582,422 of 2,507,572 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
5 ( #139,887 of 2,507,572 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes