1 year ago

Boring Old Impact Factors

I had an interview recently where one of the interviewers turned their nose up at two of my publications because they were in PLoS ONE. I found myself having to defend the journal (oddly not the actual articles, despite the fact that one was of direct relevance to the position) and our decision to publish there (the reasons are numerous: open access, quick, broad readership, new and shiny, online only, metrics etc.).

None of my defence made any impact, excuse the pun.

I know there are people around who obsess over impact factor, but really, JUST READ THE PAPER!! Then you know whether it’s good or bad. There are forgotten gems in any number of cut-price, flimsy pamphlets and the occasional lumps of steaming dog food in the big name journals.

Just READ IT! Simple.

A week or so after the interview PLoS ONE got its first impact factor, a rather healthy 4.351 (it’s that 0.001 that makes all the difference). I’m much too fair-minded to point this out. After-all, who cares about impact factor?