Is the Fever for High Impact a Disadvantage for Systematists?

Neotropical Entomology

Volumn 43, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 295-297

  Benitez H A ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSIDAD DE TARAPACÁ   (Chile)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

TRENDS; ZOOLOGY;

ENTOMOLOGY;

EID: 84904414027     PISSN: 1519566X     EISSN: 16788052     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s13744-014-0217-x     Document Type: Letter

References (22)

1. Agnarsson I, Kuntner M (2007) Taxonomy in a changing world: seeking solutions for a science in crisis. Syst Biol 56(3): 531-539.
2. Boero F (2001) Light after dark: the partnership for enhancing expertise in taxonomy. Trends Ecol Evol 16: 266.
3. Boero F (2005) Lots of biodiversity research services but... for whom? MarBEF Newsl 2: 27.
4. Boero F (2010) The study of species in the era of biodiversity: a tale of stupidity. Diversity 2: 115-126.
5. Bornmann L, Daniel HD (2005) Selection of research fellowship recipients by committee peer review: reliability, fairness and predictive validity of board of trustees decisions. Scientometrics 63: 297-320.
6. Callaham M, Wears RL, Weber E (2002) Journal prestige, publication bias, and other characteristics associated with citation of published studies in peer-reviewed journals. JAMA 287(21): 2847-2850.
7. Della Sala S, Crawford JR (2007) A double dissociation between impact factor and cited half-life. Cortex 43: 174-175.
8. Foley J (2013) Peer review, citation ratings and other fetishes. Springer Sci Rev 1: 5-7.
9. Hvistendahl M (2013) China's publication bazaar. Science 342: 1035-1039.
10. Jones AW (2003) Impact factors of forensic science and toxicology journals: what do the numbers really mean? Forensic Sci Int 133(1-2): 1-8.
11. Krell F-T (2000) Impact factors aren't relevant to taxonomy. Nature 405(6786): 507-508.
12. Krell F-T (2002) Why impact factors don't work for taxonomy. Nature 415: 957.
13. McDade LA, Maddison DR, Guralnick R, Piwowar HA, Jameson ML, Helgen KM, Herendeen PS, Hill A, Vis ML (2011) Biology needs a modern assessment system for professional productivity. Bioscience 61: 619-625.
14. Páll-Gergely B (2014) Suggestions to improve the Taxonomy Index (T-Index) introduced by Valdecasas (2011). Zootaxa 3780(2): 399-400.
15. Pendlebury DA (2009) The use and misuse of journal metrics and other citation indicators. Scientometrics 57: 1-11.
16. Rodman JE (2007) Reflections on PEET, the partnerships for enhancing expertise in taxonomy. Zootaxa 1668: 41-46.
17. Rodman JE, Cody JH (2003) The taxonomic impediment overcome: NSF's partnerships for enhancing expertise in taxonomy (PEET) as a model. Syst Biol 52(3): 428-435.
18. Seglen PO (1997) Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. BMJ 314(7079): 498-502.
19. Valdecasas AG (2011) An index to evaluate the quality of taxonomic publications. Zootaxa 2925: 57-62.
20. Valdecasas AG, Castroviejo S, Marcus LF (2000) Reliance on the citation index undermines the study of biodiversity. Nature 403(6771): 698.
21. van der Velde G (2001) Taxonomists make a name for themselves. Nature 414(6860): 148.
22. Wägele H, Klussmann-Kolb A, Kuhlmann M, Haszprunar G, Lindberg D, Koch A, Wägele JW (2011) The taxonomist - an endangered race. A practical proposal for its survival. Front Zool 8: 25.