The impact factor, introduced by Eugene Garfield in 1972, is a measure of the influence of scientific journals. It evaluates the influence of a scientific journal by measuring the average number of citations its articles receive over a given period of time, typically two years. It is calculated by dividing the number of citations in a given year to articles published in the previous two years by the total number of articles published in those years. Journals obtain their Impact Factor from Clarivate’s Journal Citation Reports, which aggregate citation data from the Web of Science, ensuring that the metric reflects citation frequency within a defined range of scholarly publications.

Critics have highlighted the limitations and potential biases of relying solely on impact factors, emphasizing that they may not accurately reflect the quality or significance of individual articles. These studies underscore the disproportionate emphasis on citation counts, which can incentivize superficial research practices and undermine scientific integrity. It’s like judging ice cream by how many pints are in the freezer — sure, it’s important to have enough for everyone, but it doesn’t tell you whether the ice cream is actually delicious.

So the impact factor has its flaws, such as overemphasizing citation counts and potentially encouraging superficial research. However, the impact factor also has advantages. It provides a quantifiable measure of a journal’s influence, which helps researchers identify where high-impact work is being published. This visibility can attract high-quality submissions and funding, fostering a competitive, innovative environment. While it shouldn’t be the sole criterion for assessing research quality, the impact factor, when used alongside other metrics, provides valuable insight into a journal’s standing in the community.

With that said, it’s a big deal for the Journal of Ecohydraulics to receive its first impact factor of 4.6. This places the journal squarely in the Q1 of the Water Resources category and signifies strong recognition and influence. It reflects the journal’s successful commitment to high-impact research and its growing reputation, which are reasons to celebrate its contribution to the advancement of knowledge and discourse in our discipline.

I have to admit that I have not submitted anything to the Journal of Ecohydraulics, nor have I done any reviews for them. But after Greg pointed out the new numbers, I took a look at some of the articles. Definitely relevant and interesting! Looking at the journal makes me want to read more, whether measured by impact factor or San Francisco DORA criteria. The journal absolutely deserves to be in Q1 Water Resources and is definitely a top address for top articles – congrats and thanks to the editors!

P.S. for the curious: The San Francisco DORA (Declaration on Research Assessment) calls for improved practices in research assessment. It advocates moving beyond metrics such as the impact factor and emphasizing qualitative measures such as the significance of research findings and their broader societal impact.

References:

• Garfield, E., 1972. Citation Analysis as a Tool in Journal Evaluation. Science 178, 471–479. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.178.4060.471
• San Francisco DORA: https://sfdora.org

Author: Sebastian Schwindt

Lives and works in Stuttgart, Germany - find out more at https://sebastian-schwindt.org and check out https://hydro-informatics.com