Clarivate removes citations to and from retracted articles from JIF - Research Information

Policy to "pre-emptively guard against widespread distortions in the Journal Impact Factor" given increase in number of retractions

20 years of bibliometric data illustrates a lack of concordance between journal impact factor and fungal species discovery in systematic mycology

Journal impact factors were devised to qualify and compare university library holdings but are frequently repurposed for use in ranking applications, research papers, and even individual applicants in mycology and beyond. The widely held assumption that mycological studies published in journals with high impact factors add more to systematic mycology than studies published in journals without high impact factors nevertheless lacks evidential underpinning. The present study uses the species hypothesis system of the UNITE database for molecular identification of fungi and other eukaryotes to trace the publication history and impact factor of sequences uncovering new fungal species hypotheses. The data show that journal impact factors are poor predictors of discovery potential in systematic mycology. There is no clear relationship between journal impact factor and the discovery of new species hypotheses for the years 2000–2021. On the contrary, we found journals with low, and even no, impact factor to account for substantial parts of the species hypothesis landscape, often discovering new fungal taxa that are only later picked up by journals with high impact factors. Funding agencies and hiring committees that insist on upholding journal impact factors as a central funding and recruitment criterion in systematic mycology should consider using indicators such as research quality, productivity, outreach activities, review services for scientific journals, and teaching ability directly rather than using publication in high impact factor journals as a proxy for these indicators.

20 years of bibliometric data illustrates a lack of concordance between journal impact factor and fungal species discovery in systematic mycology

OSF

How to address the geographical bias in academic publishing

### Summary box The commitment by the global health community to promote equity in research, publishing and practice is a welcome addition to the discourse on decolonising global health.1 2 Bibliometric analysis of authorship and prime authorship positioning (first and last) has demonstrated that researchers from low-income and middle-income countries or the Global South are under-represented in academic publishing3–5 highlighting the need for diversification. Concomitantly, journals have made efforts to ensure equitable research collaboration3 and authorship practices,6 to diversify editorial boards, and to improve accessibility of research through open access (OA) policies to increase Global South representation.4 However, there has been little attention paid to where research is disseminated. Academic publishing is dominated by journals from Western Europe and North America—henceforth WENA or the Global North—where major publishers and citation databases are based. Global North journals are often associated with international and global-level prestige, while Global South journals are presumed to be local, national or regional in scope. Despite increased OA publication, many peer-reviewed articles remain behind paywalls and out of reach of the very communities on whom …

Clarivate Announces Partnership with AI21 Labs as part of its Generative AI Strategy to Drive Growth

/PRNewswire/ -- Clarivate Plc (NYSE: CLVT), a global leader in connecting people and organizations to intelligence they can trust to transform their world,...