The recent pandemic stimulated scientists to publish a significant amount of research that created a surge of citations of COVID-19-related papers in a short time, leading to an abrupt inflation of the journal impact factor (IF). By auditing the complete set of COVID-19-related publications in the Web of Science, we reveal here that COVID-19-related research worsened the polarization of academic journals: the IF before the pandemic was proportional to the increment of IF, which had the effect of increasing inequality while retaining the journal rankings. We also found that the most highly cited studies related to COVID-19 were published in prestigious journals at the onset of the epidemic, independent of their innate importance or quality. Through the present quantitative investigation, our findings caution against the belief that quantitative metrics, particularly IF, can indicate the significance of individual papers. Rather, such metrics reflect the social attention given to a particular study.
翻译:最近发生的这一大流行病促使科学家发表大量研究,在很短的时间内导致大量引用与COVID-19有关的论文,导致日记影响因素(IF)突然膨胀。我们通过对科学网中与COVID-19有关的整套出版物进行审计,在此发现,COVID-19有关的研究使学术期刊的两极分化更加恶化:该流行病之前的综合框架与IF的上升成正比,后者具有日益加剧不平等的影响,同时保留了期刊的排名。我们还发现,在艾滋病爆发时,与COVID-19有关的最引人瞩目的研究报告在著名期刊中发表,而不论其重要性和质量为何。通过目前的定量调查,我们的调查结果告诫人们不要相信数量指标,特别是IF,能够表明个别论文的重要性。相反,这类指标反映了对特定研究的社会关注。