Significance of impact factor

The best news ever, in my opinion, came in unexpectedly from from Quora forum regarding this issue. Someone asked “What is the significance of the impact factor?” and a very interesting answer came in from W.Gunn:

It has little significance anymore, except among those who haven’t been paying attention for the past 10 years or so. There  is international consensus by bibliometricians on the idea that the IF  should not be used by researchers. Please read the Leiden Manifesto Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics and the Declaration on Research Assessment San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA)

The  best thing to do, if you’re looking for a journal in which to publish,  is to ask an academic librarian in your field of study. You can also ask  a senior colleague which are the respected journals in the field, but  if they start talking about Impact Factor, give them a copy of the above  referenced materials and go ask someone else.

Even the countries which used to include IF in assessment exercises which determine grant allocation are now moving away from using the metric.

I hope it will change the picture very soon!

Временная перспектива – русско-язычные исследования

О чем же проводят исследования наши русско-язычные коллеги все эти годы? Я давно задавалась этим вопросом. И может есть какие-то тенденции, “мода” на определенные темы? Мы пытались как-то собирать сведения об исследованиях, ведь нам, разработчикам методики, это очень интересно на самом деле. Автоматизировали мы это только в 2013 году, до предыдущих лет не знаю, когда руки дойдут..

Вот, какая у нас картинка сложилась:







первая половина года


Human organisations..

Human organisations are not at all like mechanisms. They are made up of living people who are driven by feelings and motives and relationships. Organisational charts show you the hierarchy, but they don’t capture how the organisation feels or how it really works. The fact is that human organisations and communities are not like the mechanisms: they are much more like organisms.

– Ken Robinson: The Element: How Finding Your Passion Changes Everything

ключи от методики Зимбардо

Мне пишут уже много лет запросы на ключи к нашей адаптации методики Зимбардо на русский язык. Надо было их как-то сразу фиксировать – иногда приходят такие интересные письма, но я их сейчас уже не могу найти ))

Вот из свежепришедшего (оригинальное правописание сохранено):

здраствуте. говорят у вас ключи к методике Зибардо. пришлите если можно.

Здравствучте Анна, провели  данную методику в университете, а ключей не можем найти! Заранее Вам Спасибо!

Особенно порадовало меня:

Здравствуйте, подскажите, пожалуйста, каким образом производится обработка результатов методики?

Какой именно методики …

Вообще, практически никто уже не подписывается. Посмотрела некоторые из более ранних запросов – обычно более длинные были преамбулы, представлялись, рассказывали немного о себе, кто, что делает, откуда, зачем методика и т.д.

Здравствуйте. Меня зовут … . Я студентка пятого курса специальности “психология”. В своей дипломной работе планирую использование опросника временной перспективы личности Ф.Зимбардо (русская версия). Мне необходимы ключи и алгоритм обработки. Заранее спасибо.

Иногда более креативно:

Здравствуйте, Анна!
Не могли бы Вы прислать ключи к методике и алгоритм обработки результатов, пожалуйста. Пишу диплом, очень хочется, что бы с Вашей помощью он стал еще более интересным и достойным!
Заранее благодарю.
…, студентка специальности психология, ВАГС, г. Волгоград.

Вспомнился мне семинар по теме, который мы делали в 2008 году про культуру профессионального общения. Нашла даже слайды с него – может пригодятся кому ))

Debate on melting science with businesses

Some random ideas and thoughts I got from participating in a debate hosted at the Suitable for Business 2013 conference (Copenhagen, Denmark). The debate was between Kim Brinckmann (from the Ministry of Science, Innovation and Higher Education), Hanne Leth Andersen (Pro-rector of Roskilde University), Morten Kold (creative director at the agency 2+1) and Rasmus Brygger (National president of a Danish youth party) and moderated by Thomas Buch-Andersen (Danmark Radio).

Kim Brinckmann (from the Ministry of Science, Innovation and Higher Education), Hanne Leth Andersen (Pro-rector of Roskilde University) at the Suitable for Business 2013

Kim Brinckmann (from the Ministry of Science, Innovation and Higher Education), Hanne Leth Andersen (Pro-rector of Roskilde University) at the Suitable for Business 2013

The discussion was sparkled by the report presented by Kim Brinckmann. Here you can find all the documentation about the innovations strategy that Denmark is planing to implement. As I understood, the problem is that although Denmark is ranked as an “innovation leader” (according to the latest EU Commission’s report “Innovation Union Scoreboard 2013“), it does not translate it enough into growth in terms of GDP.

The innovation strategy will ensure that more of Denmark’s knowledge and business positions of strength are translated to new jobs and growth. It will support a more goal-oriented Danish approach to creating innovative solutions to global societal challenges. The innovation strategy contains 27 policy initiatives regarding research, innovation and education. It focuses on a better knowledge exchange between companies and knowledge institutions, across borders and between the public and private sector.
Some of the points of the proposed strategy are very interesting, like giving some business oriented education to the students and PhD candidates. I agree to that. However, I’m not so sure that limiting the research by very specific projects and partnerships will foster creativity and innovation. Mr. Brinckmann has mentioned one of such partnership would be in the field of pig production. How many innovative methods of pig farming can you create? Reminds me of the old creativity boost task – what can you do with a brick?

But at the end of the day it will be only a solution to one particular problem. Researchers will produce innovation in one very narrow area, but they will stop producing general knowledge about how things are around us. We’ll need to learn to package our ideas about a general mechanism that can be applied to a variety of situations into a box addressed for specific needs. But then how the innovativeness in that particular area will be transferred to other domains? Or it’s not the aim?

I understand that research results should reach the society, the intended user, in one way or another, but from the other hand, all of the research shouldn’t be completely market driven. If we think back to the biggest discoveries – there wasn’t a need for them from the society. In some instances the society was even against. It took years until they got accepted and applied, like observations of Copernicus or the use of soap in hospitals.

The government wants us to innovate, but when we do the scientific society doesn’t really support this process. Both the industries and the research institutions talk about cross-disciplinary research and applications. However, when it comes to reporting the results – it’s a very difficult task. There is no platform for that.

There will be something happening in the scientific bubble soon, I think. The demand for publications is so high these days, that one single study is being chopped into parts, into smaller pieces in order to produce more papers, in hope of more citations, the struggle to get into a journal with a high impact factor, etc…. In the end we loose track and the big picture…

I agree with another speaker at the conference – Anne Skare Nielsen (Future Navigator) when she says that right now we experience abundance of solutions and we do not need more, but we should use what is here already. Productivity should be about creating more value, producing meaning and meaningful stuff and gross national happiness.

We do not need more soap. We need more people that can teach others how to use it.
Why exactly do we need more innovation? For statistics? Why not instead of aiming at creating more innovations, aim at creating opportunities for make a better use of what is already there?

Sometimes less is more!

Suitable for Business 2013 conference, Copenhagen, Denmark

Suitable for Business 2013 conference, Copenhagen, Denmark

Anne Skare Nielsen (Future Navigator) at Suitable for Business 2013 conference, Copenhagen, Denmark