Clarivate Analytics: Continued Omnia vanitas Impact Factor Culture

Area of Science:

• Bibliometrics
• Scholarly Communication
• Research Evaluation

Background:

• Clarivate Analytics erroneously congratulated non-Highly Cited Researchers (HCRs) via email.
• A subsequent apology email attempted to minimize the error and praise actual HCRs.

Purpose of the Study:

• To critique a recent error by Clarivate Analytics regarding Highly Cited Researchers (HCRs) designation.
• To examine the implications of this error on the perception and use of research metrics like the Journal Impact Factor (JIF).

Main Methods:

• This is an opinion paper analyzing a specific incident.
• The analysis focuses on the communication from Clarivate Analytics and their response to the error.

Main Results:

• Clarivate Analytics made a significant error in identifying Highly Cited Researchers (HCRs).
• The company's response was perceived as an attempt to downplay the error and maintain the perceived value of HCR status.
• The incident highlights concerns about the commercialization and misuse of metrics such as the Journal Impact Factor (JIF).

Conclusions:

• The blunder and corporate opacity reinforce the view of the Journal Impact Factor (JIF) as a marketing tool, not a true measure of research quality or influence.
• The commercialization of metrics like JIF distorts the assessment of researchers and journals, potentially leading to futile scientific endeavors.