The extreme version of this would be a journal that only contains one, very popular, paper.
Sounds weird, but what is the harm actually? We assume that the paper is good. How could the journal abuse the situation? If they start publishing bad papers afterwards, they will ruin the average.
I guess it’s annoying to have several such journals at the top of rankings lists. Similarly to how if you look up a list of premier league footballers with the highest goals per game, the list will normally be restricted to players who’ve played a certain number of games.
Possible, but then I am curious about the details. I think that a well-designed system should resist even creating a separate journal for each article. I mean, those articles/journals still need to get citations from outside, that is the difficult part.
Is there something like “a citation from a different journal is worth more than a citation from the same journal” which would encourage making each article a separate journal so that each citation has a maximum value? I think this can still be gamed by making two or three parallel journals, and placing each article to the opposite of the cited articles.
I assume the minimum number was put into place in order to prevent another method of gaming the system.
Impact factor is some average citation count, so without a minimum you could game it by waiting for one big hit paper.
The extreme version of this would be a journal that only contains one, very popular, paper.
Sounds weird, but what is the harm actually? We assume that the paper is good. How could the journal abuse the situation? If they start publishing bad papers afterwards, they will ruin the average.
I guess it’s annoying to have several such journals at the top of rankings lists. Similarly to how if you look up a list of premier league footballers with the highest goals per game, the list will normally be restricted to players who’ve played a certain number of games.
Possible, but then I am curious about the details. I think that a well-designed system should resist even creating a separate journal for each article. I mean, those articles/journals still need to get citations from outside, that is the difficult part.
Is there something like “a citation from a different journal is worth more than a citation from the same journal” which would encourage making each article a separate journal so that each citation has a maximum value? I think this can still be gamed by making two or three parallel journals, and placing each article to the opposite of the cited articles.