Abstract
This paper advances the debate on scholarly publishing and the role of bibliometric indices in evaluating authors and their research, through a theoretical discussion and an empirical case study focused on economics and the impact factor. The rationale of the current bibliometric system is that reputation, assessed by citation figures, can be converted into an objective measure. We instead argue that it provides questionable results, because it fails to properly consider the meaning of indicators built for different purposes, as well as the psychological bias generated by the wrong interpretation of those indicators. However, the potential for abating these distortions exists.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
