
arXiv: 2408.10262
There has been some concern about the impact of predatory publishers on scientific research for some time. Recently, publishers previously viewed as ‘predatory’ have established their bona fides , at least to the extent that they are included in impact scores such as the field-weighted citation impact (FWCI). These are sometimes called grey publishers (MDPI, Frontiers, Hindawi). We show that the citation landscape for these grey publications is significantly different from the mainstream landscape and that affording grey publications the same status as mainstream journals may significantly distort metrics such as the FWCI.
FOS: Computer and information sciences, Digital Libraries, Digital Libraries (cs.DL)
FOS: Computer and information sciences, Digital Libraries, Digital Libraries (cs.DL)
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
