Research productivity for the scholar is often evaluated on the basis of his/her journal articles; however, specific journals are said to possess a higher measure of impact than others (Archambault & Larivière, 2009; Garfield, 2006; Glänzel & Moed, 2002). When a scholar decides where to publish, (s)he might consider a journal’s impact factor. Although Garfield (1973) claimed that citation counts to individual articles will determine the impact factor of a journal, newer evidence points to the contrary: a journal with a high impact factor can also influence an article’s readership and subsequent citation rates (Larivière & Gingras, 2010). This “chicken-and-egg” dispute (i.e., citations first or impact first?) can be tested, but can still have negative consequences for how journals are selected, rated, listed, and used by policymakers for developing measures of scholarly performance. For instance, in countries like Denmark and Spain classified journal lists are now being produced and used in the calculation of nationwide performance indicators. As a result, Danish and Spanish scholars are advised to contribute to journals of high “authority” (as in the former) or those within a high class (as in the latter). This can create a few problems.

Trabajo presentado a la 21st International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators: "Peripheries, frontiers and beyond", celebrada en Valencia (España) del 14 al 16 de septiembre de 2016.

Nicolas Robinson-Garcia is supported by a Juan de la Cierva-Formación Fellowship granted by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness.

Peer Reviewed