Journal impact factors - the good, the bad, and the ugly

Abstract

This paper provides an overview of the concepts of citations and journal impact factors, and the implications of these metrics for the Journal of the Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (JSAIMM). Two key research literature databases publish journal impact factors; namely, Web of Science and Scopus. Different equations are used to calculate journal impact factors and care should be exercised when comparing different journals. The JSAIMM has a low impact factor compared with some of the more prestigious journals. It nevertheless compares well with journals serving other mining sectors, such as the Canadian CIM Journal. The problems associated with journal impact factors are discussed. These include questionable editorial practices, the negative impact of this concept on good research, and the problem of a few highly cited papers distorting the journal impact factor. As a consequence, there is growing resistance to the use of journal impact factors to measure research excellence. The San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment is a global movement striving for an alternative assessment of research quality. As a recommendation, the Editorial Board of the JSAIMM should adopt a pragmatic approach and not alter good journal policies simply to increase the journal impact factor. The focus should remain on publishing excellent quality papers. Marketing of the Journal, the quality of the published papers, and its open access policy should be used to counter the perception that journals with high impact factors are better options in which to publish good research material.