Misleading Metrics: A New List on This Blog

Misleading Metrics

Another list of questionable companies.

I have added a third list to this blog, and it is called Misleading Metrics.

The purpose of the new list is to alert researchers to bogus metrics companies that have emerged over about the past year.

Predatory publishers use these metrics to make their journals look legitimate. The metrics companies’ customers are the predatory publishers.

The new page includes the criteria for inclusion. It debuts with these 11 companies:

If you observe a journal that boasts a score given by one of these metrics companies, then I recommend that you proceed with caution.

Here is an example of how these bogus metrics are used:

International Journal of Research in Advent Technology

Holy Impact Factor !

This is from the homepage of the International Journal of Research in Advent Technology (whatever that is).

This value was assigned to the journal by International Impact Factor Services. The journal does not have an authentic impact factor assigned by Thomson Reuters. This metric is an impostor.

28 Responses to Misleading Metrics: A New List on This Blog

  1. Clifford W. Beninger says:

    Excellent and timely new addition Jeffrey!

  2. RMS says:

    Jeffrey, I appreciate this new list. It’s pretty easy to detect ‘fake’ metrics, but maybe you can clarify on your site, or here is the comments, what methodology you use to categorize a metric as “misleading”.

    What I am trying to get at is: can a company other than Thomson Reuters and the like come up with a new “impact factor”? Or is this technically impossible due to lack of access to citation data?

    I do see some value in an ‘extended’ impact factor that accounts for the many journals not covered by ISI, which are in large part new Open Access journals (not all of them predatory). Sure, such an impact factor would be easier to game since it would include “predatory” journals, but for the real journals that do not have an ISI IF this could be useful and insightful. Does such an impact factor already exist, or do all new IF companies simply make up the values out of thin air (as I am supposing most of the companies in your list are doing)?

    Thanks.

    • Hey, Rafael, Thanks for your comment. I do think that most of the companies on this list make up the value out of thin air, as you say.
      Here is one new metric that is looking pretty good: pre-SCORE. So, if you are hinting that I am going to put all companies other than TR on my list, this shows otherwise! There are also tons of new altmetric companies that are not on the list. What separates those on the list from those not on it is honesty, chiefly.
      I do list the criteria on the actual page where the companies are listed. That’s my methodology.

      • RMS says:

        Thanks for the reply, Jeffrey. I didn’t realize this was not the actual page of the list.

      • tekija says:

        Friend or foe? From today’s spam:

        “PubAdvanced is like Pubmed but with Advanced Useful Features. It was developed directly with Pubmed API’s, and improved by the advices of thousands of Key Opinion Leaders on the leading network in Life Sciences (80,000 companies & institutions are already registered)

        On PubAdvanced, you can sort out publications by their CitImpacts (based on the number of citations and impact factors), search simultaneously patents, know the web popularity of your publications and much more.

        PubAdvanced is daily used by thousands of researchers and last month more than 680,000 Citimpacts were calculated.

        Pubadvanced – Espace des Remparts 10, CH-1950, Sion 2, Switzerland”

      • Mik says:

        I’d like to second tekija’s request for an opinion on PubAdvanced.

  3. Liam Mac Liam says:

    Hope you are not being too harsh on the Directory of Journal Quality Factor, Jeffrey – after all they are partnered with such august bodies as the International NonOlympic University and the the International Nobel Peace Prize Recommendation Forum who point out on their website that “The board of directors tires to divulge the capabilities of intelligentsias and finally recommends the elite researchers and profession” . Nothing to worry about there then as they are obviously pretty exhaustive in their approach.

    No doubt as we read they are busy signing protocols with the DisUnited Nations, The NonEuropean Union and the World UnHealth Organization.

  4. Jeremy says:

    Hindawi is a fake bogus publishing house. Can you please include it in your list, sir?

  5. Xion yuen says:

    I object to your statement that: “The journal does not have an authentic impact factor assigned by Thomson Reuters.”
    All companies are bogus, including Thomson Reuters. You are continuously doing the cheap publicity of Thompson Reuters and trying to prove that all others are fake. No impact factor is necessary for any research journal. I found that your blog is of very low standard.

    • You missed the point. The journal was trying to mislead people to think that it had a real impact factor, that is, one assigned by Thomson Reuters. In fact, it does not. This conversation is not about the validity of TR; it’s about deceiving people.

      “All companies are bogus.” That’s really profound, and I encourage you to pursue your thesis — in an open-access journal with no impact factor, of course.

      And, hopefully, since you found that my “blog is of very low standard” you won’t be coming round here no more.

      Or, are you one of Lin’s lackeys, sent here to harass?

    • It looks very low quality. I have added it to my backlog. There are about ten new journals like this appearing from India each week, and unfortunately, I no longer have the time to analyze them all.

      • tekija says:

        Today got a mail from http://www.peertechz.com/index
        Not on the list – as new ones are literally popping up quicker than one can evaluate them, a list of journals that have passed you scrutiny is becoming useful: to spot the ones that are not evaluated at all.

        “Authors if they want to suggest the reviewers from their prominent colleagues for review processing, editorial office have been accept them.”

    • Abhishek Rai says:

      WOW! The latest issue contains 100 articles! Extraordinary! http://www.researchscholar.co.in/latestissues.php Surely the Indian publishers like Bite, Jitendra etc are in a race for Guinness Book of World Records! LOL!

  6. Bill White says:

    Yes, misleading metrics, indeed, including the traditional impact factor itself!
    Again, see a recent paper about it here:
    http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11948-014-9517-0

    Why there should be an impact factor for a journal or for an author?
    Unfortunately, classification of everything (including women and men) is one of the drawbacks of the capitalist system to make everything for profit; we classify journals and people in term of profit and money!
    We classify journals, even if subjectively, it does not matter, because the ends justify the means!
    I decided not to submit to any journal with impact factor!
    Some of the so-called scientists are closed minded and insist on the impact factor despite its innumerable vices.

    • Shawn says:

      Impact Factors doesn’t care what journals “You” specifically publish in.

      Think of it this way, like music, the charts that ranks all the pop songs. You are an indie band that hates pop music, so you “Refuse” to be charted. However, as soon as people start buying/listening to your songs, it climbs up the charts. The only way you can avoid becoming charted is by having as few people buy/listen to your songs as possible.

      So the only way to accomplish your goal is by publishing papers that no one will cite. That’s actually pretty easy.

      • Bill White says:

        Hah!
        Did you really know what the impact factor really means?
        Did you really read, and grasp the information you read in the article above, about the impact factor?
        Search google annd pubmed about the distortion about the impact factor.

        Also, what a citation does mean?
        X cites Y cites Z cites A cites C cites D cites E, Cites X,…bla bla bla, and then? What else? What then? If someone is cited 1000 times, what does this mean?
        It is the human EGO, which looks for some recognition in any form!
        Citation is just for citation!
        True and useful Science is that science resulting in concrete patent! All the citation and so, are without real usefulness.

      • Shawn says:

        I never once argued that it is good or bad. I’m simply pointing out that if you publish something and get cited, it will show up no matter if you like it or not.

        Impact factors are nothing more than 1 tool of many tools. The only people that go crazy over it are the ones that over-value it. Most experienced librarians and scholars already understand this.

  7. Abhishek Rai says:

    Would you please have a look Sir? This site http://drji.org/Default.aspx which runs indexing services and has formulated something like “DRIJ Value” looks suspicious because it is using WorldCat search widget for misleading people in making them believe as if Worldcat is associated with them. They claim partnership with Worldcat, EBSCO etc. But all these seem to be fake, for such widgets are available for use on any site by anyone? Here is how they claim to process indexing but this seems to have been lifted out of some other place or just created for fooling people: http://drji.org/AboutIndexing.aspx
    They also seem to be running this service–something very suspicious.
    Regards

  8. […] Beall, known for his list of possible predatory publishers, has launched a new list, Misleading Metrics. “Predatory publishers use these metrics to make their journals look legitimate,” […]

  9. […] of Scholarly Open-Access Publishing, has included  a new list of disreputable publications, Misleading Metrics. The purpose of the new list is to alert researchers to bogus metrics companies that have emerged […]

  10. Donny says:

    Dear Beall,
    Could you comment on these journals, International Journal of Academic Research, Journal of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences and Journal of Applied Environmental and Biological Sciences. I am wondering on the facts that these journals do not mention the chronology of reviewing steps (time of receiving, revising and accepting an article prior to publication. Thanks in advance

    • The International Journal of Academic Research appears to be a subscription journal (not open-access). I haven’t analyzed it.
      Same thing for the Journal of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences.
      The Journal of Applied Environmental and Biological Sciences is published by Textroad Journals, which is on my list. So, I recommend against submitting any papers to it.

  11. SSingh says:

    Today I got this email. Looks totally misleading impact factor as the journal started only in 2012. And they claim ISRA impact factor as if it is valid:

    Dear Professor

    The Fifth International Joint Conference on Advances in Engineering and Technology-AET 2014, will be held during Dec 13-14, in NCR-Delhi region, INDIA. AET2014, is aims at bringing together the researchers, scientists, engineers, and scholar students in all areas of Engineering and Technology, and provides an international forum for the dissemination of original research results, new ideas and practical development experiences which concentrate on both theory and practices. The conference has the focus on the frontier topics in the Computer Science, Electrical & Electronics Engineering, Mechanical Engineering and Civil Engineering subjects. AET2014 conference is jointly organised by the IDES, ACEECom, AMAE and ACEE.

    http://aet.theides.org/2014/

    AET 2014 will have FOUR tracks

    TRACK 1 – Computer Science- http://aet.theides.org/2014/acs.htm
    TRACK 2 – Electrical & Electronics- http://aet.theides.org/2014/aee.htm
    TRACK 3 – Mechanical Engineering- http://aet.theides.org/2014/ame.htm
    TRACK 4 – Civil Engineering- http://aet.theides.org/2014/ace.htm

    All the accepted registered papers of AET 2014 will be published by the Research Publishing Services (both Print and CD media) and it will be made available in the RPS Online, and will be indexed in CrossRef. In addition, it will be submitted to possible indexing in all the major indexing services like EI, ISI Web of Science, DBLP, IET Inspec, Scopus etc

    Extended version of the registered and presented PAPERS will be published in the special issue of the eSAT Journal -International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology ( Impact Factor: 2.375)

    http://ijret.org/

    Prospective authors are invited to submit full (original) research papers; which are NOT submitted or published or under consideration anywhere in other conferences or journals; in electronic (PDF only) format through the CMT Conference Management Toolkit website or via email aet.chair@gmail.com

    Last Date of Paper Submission (Extended): 10 Oct, 2014

    You may also have a look at the conference organized by IDES at http://conference.theides.org/

    If this call for paper is not of your area of interest; please forward to a researcher who is working in this area.

    Thanking you and Best Regards,

  12. Dirk Verdicchio says:

    There is another one called PIF (Publication Impact Factor): http://www.i2or.com/ claims to index journal and taking into acount the citations, quality of the research, the quality of the publication, the editorial quality, etc.

Leave a Reply -- All comments are subject to moderation, including removal.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: