LAUSR.org creates dashboard-style pages of related content for over 1.5 million academic articles. Sign Up to like articles & get recommendations!

Understanding Traditional Research Impact Metrics

Photo by _louisreed from unsplash

Traditionally, the success of a researcher has been judged by the number of publications he or she has published in peer-review, indexed, high impact journals. However, to quantify the impact… Click to show full abstract

Traditionally, the success of a researcher has been judged by the number of publications he or she has published in peer-review, indexed, high impact journals. However, to quantify the impact of research in the wider scientific community, a number of traditional metrics have been used, including Impact Factor, SCImago Journal Rank, Eigenfactor Score, and Article Influence Score. This article attempts to provide a broad overview of the main traditional impact metrics that have been used to assess scholarly output and research impact. We determine that there is no perfect all-encompassing metric to measure research impact, and, in the modern era, no single traditional metric is capable of accommodating all facets of research impact. Academics and researchers should be aware of the advantages and limitations of traditional metrics and should be judicious when selecting any metrics for an objective assessment of scholarly output and research impact.

Keywords: understanding traditional; research; impact metrics; impact; traditional research; research impact

Journal Title: Clinical Spine Surgery
Year Published: 2017

Link to full text (if available)


Share on Social Media:                               Sign Up to like & get
recommendations!

Related content

More Information              News              Social Media              Video              Recommended



                Click one of the above tabs to view related content.