Using annual reviews to massage the impact factor
Case text (Anonymised)
The editor in chief of Journal A is also on the editorial board of Journal B. Journal B publishes “annual reviews” that purport to describe recent advances in the field, but only do this by discussing and citing their own content. The editor in chief of Journal A now wants to have “annual reviews” in his journal to help increase the impact factor.
- In your experience, is this standard practice?
- If not, how do we convince the editor-in-chief to change his mind?
- The ISI should have mechanisms to stamp this practice out.
- The practice is very prevalent, and well known reviews significantly increase the impact factor and this is bad practice.
- External editors see it is as standard practice, and journals can ask for citation to make it easier for the reader, but where to draw the line?
- COPE will write to ISI.