| Summary: | This paper contains a summary of criticism on use of the impact factor (IF) as an indicator of the quality of work published by researchers. The criticism is directed to authors who are trying to publish in journals with IF. The claim is they are renouncing their own identity and prioritizing their curriculum over the usefulness of their research. The authors challenge this criticism by arguing that stringent assessment criteria stimulate the internationalisation of science, that there is a consensus in the scientific community about the imperfections of FI and its acceptance as a valid and necessary tool for scientific evaluation, and that the debate over identity does little to resolve the international invisibility of nursing research written up in Spanish. Proposals are outlined on how to benefit from the strengths of this system to increase the visibility of nursing research, to develop strategies for including journals written in Spanish in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR), to encourage professional training and interdisciplinary cooperation, to promote the publication of research conducted in postgraduate programs, and to claim an editorial commitment for indexing their journals in the JCR. It can be concluded that, although difficult, it would be possible to increase the visibility of nursing scientific research in Spanish.
|
|---|