PoLAR will have a 2012 Impact Factor

Little known by the members of APLA, every June there is a publishing flutter when Thomson Reuters publishes the prior year’s “Impact Factors.” Some of this buzz reflects jockeying among medical and hard science journal editors and publishers, flapping about who is number 1—or who fell to number 5. While not a flap of this magnitude, APLA members could pause and congratulate their current (John Conley and Justin Richland) and past editors for their journal’s debut in June 2013 on the “Anthropology” list.

In order to be indexed on a given list, publishers (like AAA and Wiley-Blackwell) have to apply. Inclusion is competitive. Thomson Reuters reports that it receives applications for more than 2,000 titles each year and only accepts 10-12% of these journals. The application process can take up to three years.

The impact factor represents a ratio of citations per scholarly units within a short timeframe, less than two years. The impact factor counts only citations from a very specific list of English-language journals, and it’s fair to say that for many disciplines the number can only provide a narrow reading of value. For instance, in some disciplines, monographs or conference proceedings are important and the impact factor is not as valid a tool as in disciplines where journals dominate the scholarly exchange. Similarly in most humanities fields, in which citations require more time than two years to publish and in which much scholarly activity is not in English, the impact factor cannot reflect the same kind of assessment as it may in more technical fields.

Any author facing the question of “where to publish my article,” views a dizzying expanse—and a geometrically growing landscape—of possible journals. Some historians of science calculate that new journals have increased at a consistent 5-7% rate each year since the late 18th century. Over three centuries, that’s spawned a vast frontier. Some authors navigate this selection process by looking for journals with impact factors, a marker that some deans and personnel committees consider extremely favorably when reviewing candidates for hiring, tenure and promotion. In addition, some libraries use the impact factor in making purchasing decisions. In other words, in any overloaded system –and scholarly journal publishing certainly qualifies—numerical shorthand can aid individuals in traversing an uneven terrain.

Ultimately, the worth of a given journal is a complex matrix of its refereeing system (or peer-review process); the promptness of its publication; the accuracy and completeness of information; and the journal’s general reputation. I’m delighted to state unambiguously that PoLAR fares extremely well across all of these criteria. However, I do not wish to undervalue the very real prestige of this honor. Whatever the shortcomings of the actual impact factor, readers should not hesitate to celebrate the editors’ substantial achievement in producing content that has been dubbed worthy of an impact factor.

Oona Schmid is director of publishing of the American Anthropological Association.

Please send ideas for future columns to the APLA contributing editors, Leo Coleman at Coleman.514@osu.edu and Allison Fish at fish.88@osu.edu.

via Anthropology-News http://www.anthropology-news.org/index.php/2013/04/01/polar-will-have-a-2012-impact-factor/