As one of the oldest and most used metrics for evaluating the impact of scholarly journals, the journal impact factor has a number of different advantages when it comes to evaluating the impact, importance and significance of a scholarly journal one may wish to publish their work in. These advantages include, but are not limited to, how well known the journal impact factor is, how easy it is to calculate and how it accounts for journals of different sizes and ages.
Renown
Simplicity
Equality
Despite its popularity and widespread adoption, the journal impact factor has a number of disadvantages and flaws that scholars must be aware of, such as using self-citation to artificially boost the impact factor, publishing a large number of review articles and the "eigenlob" author self-citation phenomenon.
Self Citation
Some publishers may require their authors to reference articles already published in that journal, therefore bumping up its impact factor
Some journal publishers may enter agreements with other publishers and require their authors to cite each other’s journals, therefore raising all of their impact factors
Review Articles
Journals may publish a large number of review articles that quickly and efficiently inflate their impact factor, since review articles typically receive many more citations than original articles
As a result, scholars who choose a journal to publish in based on its impact factor may be selling themselves short, since "60% of the top 25 journals, as ranked by the ISI impact factor, are journals publishing only reviews and summaries of past research" (Falagas & Vangelis 224)
Eigenlob Author Self-Citation Phenomenon
In order to take advantage of how the journal impact factor is calculated, some journals may only accept authors who publish a lot of research, which includes citing their own work
Journals may also prefer to publish papers that have many authors, as this increases the chance of self-citation and so increases that journal’s impact factor
Works Cited