The ISI list is good, but not complete and they are making it easier for journals centered in the third world to get inclusion than for those from North America. This is right from ISI, no misconceptions. I spoke directly with their evaluations folks in my work with HCB. They willingly and openly are increasing inclusion of non-US journals that would not make it if they were a North American Journal. ISI is a business and is trying to expand its impact for financial reasons into these other region.
Enough griping from my end. On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 10:20 AM, Mitch Cruzan<cru...@pdx.edu> wrote: > The standard most people use is the Institute for Scientific Information > (ISI) list of journals. ISI use to do Science Citation Index and now runs > databases like Web of Science (see > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_for_Scientific_Information). The > criteria for selection is fairly conservative and includes peer review. You > can see an explanation here: > http://thomsonreuters.com/products_services/science/free/essays/journal_selection_process/ > > I tell my students that they can only use journals listed by ISI. The list > of journals is huge and I have never run into a citation from the last few > decades that I could not find by searching WoS (it only goes back to 1977). > ISI also maintains a list of "Impact Factors," which you can use to get a > rough idea of journal quality based on how often papers get cited. > Kerry Griffis-Kyle wrote: >> >> I am teaching a Sophomore/Junior level evolution course at Texas Tech >> (where a significant proportion of my students believe evolution is >> anti-God). One of the activities I have them do is take three creationist >> claims about science and use the peer-reviewed scientific literature to find >> evidence to support or refute the claim. It makes them really think about >> the issues; and if they follow the directions, it does a better job than any >> of my classroom activities convincing them that the claims against evolution >> are just a bunch of hooey. Unfortunately, there are journals claiming >> peer-review status that are not. It can be very frustrating. Like >> Raphael, I also wonder if there is a good source the students can use as a >> rubric for telling if a journal article is peer-reviewed. >> >> ***************************** >> Kerry Griffis-Kyle >> Assistant Professor >> Department of Natural Resources Management >> Texas Tech University >> >> --- On Tue, 7/7/09, Raphael Mazor <rapha...@sccwrp.org> wrote: >> >> >> From: Raphael Mazor <rapha...@sccwrp.org> >> Subject: [ECOLOG-L] "real" versus "fake" peer-reviewed journals >> To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU >> Date: Tuesday, July 7, 2009, 5:03 PM >> >> >> I've noticed a number of cases lately where groups with a strong political >> agenda (on topics like climate change, evolution, stem cells, or human >> health) cite "peer reviewed" studies in journals that are essentially >> fabricated for the purpose of advancing a specific viewpoint. >> >> What's a good way to tell when a journal is baloney? Of course, it's easy >> for a scientist in his or her own field to know when a journal is a sham, >> but how can we let others know it's obviously fake? For example, are only >> "real" journals included on major abstract indexing services? >> >> -- <><><><><><><><><> >> Raphael D. Mazor >> Biologist >> Southern California Coastal Water Research Project >> 3535 Harbor Boulevard, Suite 110 >> Costa Mesa, CA 92626 >> >> Tel: 714-755-3235 >> Fax: 714-755-3299 >> Email: rapha...@sccwrp.org >> >> >> >> >> > > -- > Mitchell B. Cruzan, Associate Professor > Department of Biology > P.O. Box 751 > Portland State University > Portland, OR 97207 > > http://web.pdx.edu/~cruzan/ > -- Malcolm L. McCallum Associate Professor of Biology Texas A&M University-Texarkana Editor, Herpetological Conservation and Biology http://www.herpconbio.org http://www.twitter.com/herpconbio Fall Teaching Schedule & Office Hours: Landscape Ecology: T,R 10-11:40 pm Environmental Physiology: MW 1-2:40 pm Seminar: T 2:30-3:30pm Genetics: M 6-10pm Office Hours: M 3-6, T: 12-2, W: 3-4 1880's: "There's lots of good fish in the sea" W.S. Gilbert 1990's: Many fish stocks depleted due to overfishing, habitat loss, and pollution. 2000: Marine reserves, ecosystem restoration, and pollution reduction MAY help restore populations. 2022: Soylent Green is People! Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
