Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 5, 2026

Qualitative and Quantitative Validation of Tools with Rating Scales Aimed at Assessing the Quality of University Service-Learning
Published on: August 29, 2025
Science deserves to be judged by its contents, not by its wrapping: Revisiting Seglen's work on journal impact and
Lin Zhang1,2, Ronald Rousseau3, Gunnar Sivertsen4
1Dept. Management and Economics, North China University of Water Resources and Electric Power, Zhengzhou, China.
Abstract:
The scientific foundation for the criticism on the use of the Journal Impact Factor (JIF) in evaluations of individual researchers and their publications was laid between 1989 and 1997 in a series of articles by Per O. Seglen. His basic work has since influenced initiatives such as the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA), the Leiden Manifesto for research metrics, and The Metric Tide review on the role of metrics in research assessment and management. Seglen studied the publications of only 16 senior biomedical scientists. We investigate whether Seglen's main findings still hold when using the same methods for a much larger group of Norwegian biomedical scientists with more than 18,000 publications. Our results support and add new insights to Seglen's basic work.
Related Concept Videos
Social Loafing
Social Foundations of Self III: Self-Evaluation
Types of Impact
The coefficient of restitution is a metric for understanding the dynamics of impacts. It quantifies the ratio of relative velocity...
Nursing Evaluation
Self-Evaluation Maintenance Model
Impact of Social Context on Individuals

