WeChat ID bainazhishi Intro 《百纳知识》是由国内外一群80后、90后为主的青年老师、研究生、本科生等共同发起的科研交流互助公益平台，旨在分享科研入门知识，分享最新科研咨询，为热爱学习、热爱科研的朋友服务。科研是一场美丽的冒险，我们愿做大家冒险旅程中真诚的陪伴者！ 作者邓思超，北京航空航天大学博士生，《百纳知识》公众号副主编，公益团体核心骨干，科技新闻、流体力学案例分享等板块负责人。研究方向包括：流动控制及减阻技术研究，飞行器设计及气动性能计算。 《百纳知识》在今年就SCI影响因子各类事件所做的系列报道清单 昨日SCI被237.3亿抛售，今日已有期刊公开宣称放弃影响因子 SCI被卖出新看点：Science等杂志联合发文，宣称和影响因子说再见！ Nature今日发文，宣布改造影响因子，重塑期刊评价体系！ Science主编将推出SCI量化新指标，有望取代原有影响因子？ 对“SCI甩卖、影响因子招摒弃”近期科研热点的杂谈 重磅|论SCI影响因子与多元化的文献计量评价指标 导语 2016年12月，学术出版巨头爱思唯尔终于拿出自己的期刊影响因子评分系统CiteScore数据库。 2016年7月，汤森路透社提前把SCI和JCR卖了237.3亿，难道他们真是天人，听到风声，感觉出了竞争对手，所以把SCI和JCR高点抛售了……。 CiteScore数据库能够使SCI影响因子彻底和科研工作评价体系say“拜拜”吗？  汤森路透影响因子JIF评价体系本身应该是客观的，但是单纯的依靠影响因子评估论文的质量，甚至评估科研工作者的水平，确是有失公允的。因此，近年来，对于SCI影响因子的争议一直不断。虽然Nature、Science、Springer是影响因子的最大受益者，却也联合在预印本网站BioRxiv上发表文章抵制影响因子，并建议采用引用分布曲线（Citation Distribution）来取代影响因子的简单算术平均。至今为止，不少权威机构纷纷提出多元化的文献计量评价指标，包括Nature的引用分布曲线、谷歌的H5指数以及中国知网的CI指数等，但多年来SCI影响因子在学术研究体系中的评价地位一直没有受到实质性挑战和撼动。 ☆CiteScore横空出世，数据更多更全，还免费 相比于影响因子，CiteScore的计算数据库更大，计算公式也做了调整，并且具有不同的科学领域的期刊排名，同时免费开放。 One of science’s most contentious metrics has a flashy new rival. On 8 December, publishing giant Elsevier launched the CiteScore index to assess the quality of academic journals. 汤森路透的影响因子作为科学界最有争议的指标之一，近期终于迎来了一个强劲的竞争对手。12月8日，出版业巨头爱斯维尔推出了自己的期刊影响力评分系统CiteScore，有望挑战影响因子的权威地位。 Although the index ranks journals with a formula that largely mimics the influential Journal Impact Factor (JIF), it covers twice as many journals — 22,000 to the JIF’s 11,000 — and its formula includes tweaks that produce some notably different results, including lower scores for some high-JIF journals. 虽然爱斯维尔CiteScore的计算公式与期刊影响因子（JIF）大致相同，但是它涵盖的期刊数量达到22000本，比JIF大一倍。并且计算公式也做了一些调整，使得一些原本高影响因子的期刊引用评分降低。 If CiteScore becomes popular, these quirks could change the behaviour of journals hoping to maximize their score, say analysts. But CiteScore comes at a challenging time for such metrics. It’s not obvious that there is an appetite for a similar competitor to the JIF, and scientists note that no matter what differences CiteScore provides, it will have to survive the same criticisms that are lobbed at its rival — most notably that the JIF is so commonly promoted by publishers as a yardstick for ‘quality’ that researchers are judged by the impact factor of the journal in which their work appears, rather than by what they actually write. 分析人士认为，如果CiteScore被广泛采用，会改变期刊片面追求评分最大化的行为。但是CiteScore这种指标评价形式也面临着挑战。人们对这样一个类似于期刊影响因子的指标并没有明显的偏好。科学家指出，不论CiteScore有什么改进，它都面临着和影响因子一样的质疑——单纯用数字指标来衡量科研人员的工作，而不是他们具体的研究内容。 “In my view, journal metrics should always be accompanied by health warnings that are at least as prominent as the ones you see on cigarette packets,” says Stephen Curry, a structural biologist at Imperial College London. “Such metrics are at the root of many of the current evils in research assessment.” 伦敦帝国学院的结构生物学家斯蒂芬·库里说：“在我看来，使用期刊指标时应该伴随着警告，就像香烟包上的健康警告一样明显。这些指标是当前许多研究评估问题的根源。” Crowded field ☆作者和编辑都需要CiteScore出世 Amsterdam-based Elsevier has for many years provided a suite of analytical indicators, including journal metrics that have never become as popular as the JIF. It says that it has launched CiteScore owing to “overwhelming demand” from authors and editors. 总部位于阿姆斯特丹的Elsevier多年来一直提供一套分析指标，包括从未像JIF一样受欢迎的杂志指标。而重磅推出CiteScore的原因是来自作者和编辑的“压倒性的需求”。 The publisher is uniquely placed to challenge the JIF’s hegemony. It owns the Scopus database, a record of article abstracts and their reference lists. Aside from Web of Science, on which the JIF is based, it is the world’s only reasonably comprehensive and carefully curated citation database. But Scopus is bigger, enabling scientists, librarians and funders to check the popularity of many more journals. Furthermore, unlike the JIF, which is available only to subscribers, CiteScore figures will be free online for anyone to view and analyse, although full details of the documents included in the calculations are visible only to subscribers. 爱斯维尔出版商在挑战JIF霸权方面具有独特的地位。它拥有Scopus数据库，文章摘要及其参考文献列表的记录。 除了JIF所基于的Web of Science，它是世界上唯一相当全面和精心策划的引文数据库。Scopus更强大的数据资源使的科学家、图书馆员和基金组织能够查看更多期刊的流行度。 此外，与仅供订阅者使用的JIF不同，CiteScore的数据将免费为所有人提供查看和分析服务，但计算中包含的文档的完整详细信息仅对订阅者可见。 When it comes to their underlying formulae, CiteScore and JIF are near-doppelgängers. To score any journal in any given year, both tot up the citations received to documents that were published in previous years, and divide that by the total number of documents. The most popular version of the JIF looks at research articles published in the previous two years, whereas CiteScore stretches back to the previous three. CiteScore和JIF的计算公式相似，都是将某期刊前几年出版的文章被引用次数加总，之后除以文章总数。不同的是影响因子是期刊前2年发表的论文在第3年的篇均引用次数，而CiteScore则是前3年发表的论文在第4年的篇均引用次数。 ☆柳叶刀排名从第4低到200以外 But one significant difference leads some high-JIF journals, such as Nature, Science and The Lancet, to do worse in CiteScore. The new metric counts all documents as potentially citable, including editorials, letters to the editor, corrections and news items. These are less cited by scholars, so they drag down the average. The Lancet, for instance, drops from a healthy average of 44 in JIF — putting it in 4th position overall — to a mere 7.7 in CiteScore, where it is outside the top 200. 但是一些高引期刊，如《Nature》，《Science》和《The Lancet》，其CiteScore评分却大幅下降。 这是因为CiteScore指标不区分文章类型，将所有文章都视为可引用的内容，包括社论，编辑信件，更正和新闻项目。而以上这些类型的文章很少被学者引用，所以所除的分母很大，拉低了平均引用次数。 例如，《The Lancet》的影响因子为44，在汤森路透排名第四，而CiteScore只有7.7，排在200名之外。 ☆对出版商造成重大冲击 Such a distinction could have major consequences for the behaviour of publishers. “As there is intense competition among top-tier journals, adoption of CiteScore will push editors to stop publishing non-research documents, or shunting them into a marginal publication or their society website,” predicts Phil Davis, a publishing consultant in Ithaca, New York. 这样的区分可能对出版商产生重要的影响。美国Ithaca出版顾问Phil Davis预言：“由于顶级期刊之间的激烈竞争，采用CiteScroe将会促使编辑停止出版非研究性的文章，或者将其分流到边缘出版物或其社会网站”。 Nature评分也大幅度降低，但Nature选择不对CiteScore表态 The Lancet, Nature and other journals declined to comment on CiteScore. But Jeremy Berg, the editor-in-chief of Science, says that the journal is “very proud of our content that lies outside traditional research reports and articles” and that “any metric that is based on citation data alone will undervalue the impact of such non-research content”. Lancet、Nature以及其他杂志均拒绝对CiteScore数据库发表评论。但是Science主编Jeremy Bery说，Science杂志对自己设置的非学术报告和论文栏目非常自豪，并且“任何基于引文数据的度量指标都将低估了这样的非研究性内容”。 “The portfolio performance of all publishers may look a bit different using CiteScore metrics, including Elsevier, but all publishers gain in that they can explore the performance of more of their titles because of the broader coverage of Scopus,” says Lisa Colledge, director of research metrics at Elsevier. She says that CiteScore should be used only to compare related journals, not to compare raw scores across different fields. For example, the index ranks The Lancet 25th out of 1,549 ‘general medicine’ journals — putting it in the top 98th percentile of journals in that subject category. “使用CiteScore度量指标，包括Elsevier在内的所有出版商的业务量可能看起来都有点不同，但是所有的出版商都可以通过Scopus广泛的覆盖面来探索更多的标题表现形式”，Elsevier评价指标研究主任Lisa Colledge如上所说。她说，CiteScore应该只用于比较相关的期刊，而不是比较不同的领域原始分数。例如，例如Lancet 在“普通医学”领域的1,549本杂志中排25名，超过98%的同类期刊。 CiteScore使用对Elsevier自己的杂志业务有25%提升 After the index was released, scientists at the Eigenfactor project, a research group at the University of Washington in Seattle, published a preliminary calculation finding that Elsevier’s portfolio of journals gains a 25% boost relative to others if CiteScore is used instead of the JIF. 在指标发布后，位于西雅图华盛顿大学的一个研究小组Eigenfactor项目的科学家们，发表了一个初步的计算结果，即如果使用CiteScore而不是JIF，Elsevier的期刊业务量相对于其他期刊将获得25%的提升。 That is because any publisher with journals that produce lesser-cited ‘non-research’ documents will see its portfolios drop under CiteScore, says Colledge, whereas those whose journals mainly publish only research articles — such as Wiley, the American Chemical Society and Elsevier — will see a relative gain. “Scopus has included all document types in CiteScore metrics because this is the most simple and transparent approach that also acknowledges every item’s potential to cite and be cited,” she says. 这是因为任何出版商包括杂志社出版引用较少的“非研究性”文章将看到其影响因子在CiteScore下评估均下降，Colledge说，而那些期刊主要发表的只有研究性文章，如Wiley, the American Chemical Society and Elsevier-将看到相对增益。“Scopus将所有文档类型都包含在CiteScore指标中，因为这是最简单、最透明的方法，也承认每一个项目均有可能引用和被引用”。 Clarivate Analytics in Philadelphia, which bought the JIF and the Web of Science earlier this year from Thomson Reuters, says that it doesn’t see any new insights in CiteScore. Other, more complex metrics —– including several published by Elsevier and Thomson Reuters — have been developed to rank journals in the past, but none has yet proved as popular as the JIF. “If anything, another, different metric will reinforce the status that the JIF has as the definitive assessment of journal impact,” says Clarivate spokesperson Heidi Siegel. 费城的Clarivate Analytics，今年早些时候从Thomson Reuters购买了JIF和Web of Science，他说在CiteScore中没有看到任何新的见解。其他更复杂的指标，包括由Elsevier和Thomson Reuters颁布的几个指标，已经被开发用来对过去的期刊进行排名，但没有一个被证明像JIF一样受欢迎。“如果有什么，另一个不同的度量指标将加强JIF作为对期刊影响的确定性评估的地位”，Clarivater发言人Heidi Sigel说。 Some even wonder whether Elsevier, which publishes more than 2,500 journals, should be producing CiteScore at all. The JIF has always been owned by non-publishers. “I question the appropriateness of a publisher getting involved with the metrics that evaluate the very content that it publishes,” says Joseph Esposito, a publishing consultant in New York City. But Elsevier says that it is "a provider of information solutions as well as a publisher", and treats all the publishers it analyses equally. 有些人甚至怀疑是否发布过超过2500个期刊的Elsevier应该产生CiteScore。其实，JIF一直掌握在非出版商手里。纽约市出版顾问约瑟夫·埃斯波索托（Joseph Esposito）说：“我怀疑发行商参与评估发布内容的指标是否恰当。但是Elsevier说，它是“信息解决方案的提供商以及出版商”，并对所有出版商进行平等分析。 总结： 作者认为，Citescore广受关注和追捧，一方面是来源于出版巨头爱斯维尔的权威地位和其强大的数据库，另一方面是人们对影响因子“一家独大”的现象颇有微词。 相比于影响因子， Citescore的优势如下： 1 数据库更强大，文献计量范围更加全面； 2 没有把不同学科的影响指标混为一谈，并对不同领域的相对排名做出区分，也是很有参考价值的。 3 中国期刊得到解放，中文版与英文版期刊，都是CiteScore数据里面，如果有一天，国内认可CiteScore数据库里面的检索期刊，认可CiteScore影响因子，那么中文期刊就会得到真正的解放，中国学术界又可能重新认可这些期刊了。 SCI数据库中，被检索的中文期刊只有几十种，而在SCOPUS中，一下就上升到好几百种了（2013年有600多种），本人所在领域的绝大部分中文核心期刊都是被这个数据库收录的。 Citescore的提出，对引导科学评价由单一化依靠影响因子，变为多元化的评价指标并行，具有重要意义。但是，Citescore仍然只是一个数字化的指标，只能定量化评价期刊的影响力，并不能全面反映科研人员的研究水平。如何建立更加科学、公正、严谨的学术评价体系，仍是值得研究和思考的问题。 小编：子心 欢迎个人转发到朋友圈 公众号、报刊等转载请联系授权 bainazhishi@163.com SCI论文署名的事儿@说说导师学生师兄之间的署名 SCI论文的绘图@让你的论文插图逼格够高？ SCI论文的那些事@投稿的流程（上） SCI论文的那些事@投稿的流程（下） SCI论文的那些事@说说期刊的排名和检索 《百纳学术》我们的论坛正式开放啦！！！ 科研系列：[干货请收藏]科研必备的12个网站 科研系列：新手科研必须要看的快速入门秘笈 [入门秘籍]矩阵是科研最基础工具，今天高人传你秘籍！ [重磅秘籍] 《数学物理宝典》第1期，数学基础篇 [重磅秘籍] 传说中的《数学物理清单》第2期，数学提升篇 百纳知识 ∣一个让你拥有更多知识的地方 长按，识别二维码，加关注 《百纳知识》由清华、中科、上交、华科、同济、北航、中南、南大、西电等高校的老师博士硕士本科生六十余人组成的公益组织联合运营。科研是一场美丽的冒险，《百纳知识》愿意做大家冒险路程中最真诚的陪伴者。 点击“阅读原文”体验一次不一样的百纳知识，不用太久，不用太难，瞬间即可！ 谢谢大家关注我们 Reward people gave a reward Author requires users to follow Official Account before leaving a comment Write a comment Write a comment Loading Most upvoted comments above Learn about writing a valuable comment Scan QR Code via WeChat to follow Official Account