[Taxacom] Fwd: Zootaxa taken off of JCR

Mon Jul 6 16:16:43 CDT 2020

As far as I can discern, EVERYONE who has commented on this issue is very much on the same page on this issue philosophically, so we're all preaching to the choir on that.  The interesting part of the discussion is the question on how we, as a community of taxonomists, should respond.  There are several options:

1) Use this as a teachable moment to push back hard against the entire system of impact factors and related metrics for all of science.
2) Use this as a teachable moment to explain why taxonomy, as a field, is disproportionately misrepresented by such metrics, and perhaps develop alternative metrics that more accurately reflect our discipline.
3) Take proactive steps to solve the immediate problem and get Zootaxa back on the list.
4) Whine and rant about it incessantly on Taxacom, then move on to the next controversy du jour, and the one after, and so on, until a couple years from now this one comes back on the table and we all repeat the same arguments again.

Of course, these are not mutually exclusive options.  I'm uneasy pursuing #1, because for all I know, practitioners in many other branches of science are perfectly happy with the system as it is.  I wouldn't presume to speak on their behalf. Number 2 seems the most reasonable approach for a long-term solution, and I've already floated some suggestions on that.  I normally wouldn't have considered the third option worth fussing about (i.e., in line with Carlos' thinking).  However, I have been reminded that this is a very real problem for real taxonomists at real institutions who are trying to get hired or achieve tenure or some other sort of promotion.  For example, I learned from a fellow ICZN Commissioner that Taiwan's Ministry of Education policy requires that national universities (including Academia Sinica), only recognize journals with impact factors as can be counted for staff performance reviews. And apparently it's even worse in Hong Kong.  Others in Europe and the U.S., and elsewhere have enlightened me to similar effect.  This forces me to acknowledge that I (and presumably Carlos as well) have the luxury of working for an institution where such metrics don't matter for hiring and promotion and such. It's probably not in our best interests to allow our taxonomic colleagues who don't share this luxury to suffer in the context of unenlightened institutions, as this would accelerate the already speedy attenuation of taxonomy as a field (a falling tide lowers all boats).

Of course, we already know that #4 is a given (should probably be added to other laws of the universe).  But the question is, where among the other three should we concentrate our efforts?  The post from Les Watling just now, in combination with information I received off-list from another ICZN Commissioner, gives some hope that #3 is already on track and will probably get sorted.  So.... should we continue to explore option #2?  Or just ride with #4?

Aloha,
Rich

P.S. I thought I sent this a couple hours ago, but just now found it in my drafts.  It seems Mike made essentially the same points.

Richard L. Pyle, PhD
Senior Curator of Ichthyology | Database Coordinator
Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum
1525 Bernice Street, Honolulu, HI 96817-2704
Office: (808) 848-4115;  Fax: (808) 847-8252
eMail: deepreef at bishopmuseum.org
BishopMuseum.org
Our Mission: Bishop Museum inspires our community and visitors through the exploration and celebration of the extraordinary history, culture, and environment of Hawaiʻi and the Pacific.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Taxacom <taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> On Behalf Of Carlos
> Alberto Martínez Muñoz via Taxacom
> Sent: Monday, July 6, 2020 6:00 AM
> To: Alfredo Vizzini <alfredo.vizzini at unito.it>
> Cc: Taxa com <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Fwd: Zootaxa taken off of JCR
> 
> Dear Michael,
> "...this issue has nothing to do with science or logic, it is purely the politics of
> academic advancement of scientists’ careers." I wholeheartedly agree.
> "We have to support that...". Definitely not.
> 
> Before I continue, I will briefly outline the logical fallacy behind the IF.
> Please read: "Fallacy of Affirming the Consequent (
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming_the_consequent)"
> 
> Summarized:
> True conditional statement:
> • If P then Q
> Invalidly concluding its converse:
> • Q
> • Therefore P
> 
> Tailored to the JIF:
> True conditional statement:
> • If it has high quality (P) then it has high repercussion (Q) Invalidly concluding
> its converse:
> • It has high repercussion (Q)
> • Therefore it has high quality (P)
> 
> Building up a scientific career on a logical fallacy may not seem a paradox to
> many but it is to me. One can be a scientist or not, one has to choose to be
> coherent or not. I do not see anything in between. This JIF issue is inherently
> incoherent and if I cannot have an academic career because I do not bow down
> to such incoherence, then so be it. Personally, I will look down to anyone trying
> to evaluate my research based on the JIF of the journals I have published in. I
> would expect that those persons do not call themselves scientists, because they
> would not be acting like scientists.
> Moreover, like many colleagues here, I am tired of this derogatory metric, to
> which authors' work doesn't matter, reviewers' work doesn't matter, just
> journal names matter. I cannot understand how the same scientists that think
> they can convince Clarivate Analytics to give back the JIF to Zootaxa also think
> that they cannot elaborate why this metric should not be used and convince
> their own institutions. Or maybe I can. It may well be that many "scientists" are
> willing to profit from the JIF for the "academic advancement of scientists’
> careers", regardless of the JIF being a fallacy.
> I hope that they can look at the mirror and see themselves for what they truly
> are.
> 
> Kind regards,
> Carlos
> 
> Carlos A. Martínez Muñoz
> Zoological Museum, Biodiversity Unit
> FI-20014 University of Turku
> Finland
> Myriatrix <http://myriatrix.myspecies.info/>
> ResearchGate profile
> <https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Carlos_Martinez-Munoz>
> Myriapod Morphology and Evolution
> <https://www.facebook.com/groups/205802113162102/>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> El lun., 6 jul. 2020 a las 16:45, Alfredo Vizzini (<alfredo.vizzini at unito.it>)
> escribió:
> 
> > ... but we must not resign ourselves and fight against this stupid
> > evaluation system
> >
> > Best
> > Alfredo Vizzini
> >
> >
> > https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Alfredo_Vizzini
> >
> >
> >                    /--- Phylogeny
> >                /---+
> >                |   \---- of unknown
> >          /-----+
> >          |     \----- Fungal
> >        --+
> >          \------------- Diversity
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Il giorno lun 6 lug 2020 alle ore 16:19 Ivie, Michael via Taxacom <
> > taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> ha scritto:
> >
> >> Carlos, this issue has nothing to do with science or logic, it is
> >> purely the politics of academic advancement of scientists’ careers.
> >> We have to support that, no matter how unscientific or illogical the
> >> mechanism (or even inappropriate) is.  I agree with your points, but not your
> conclusion.
> >> Mike
> >>
> >>
> >> __________________________________________________
> >> Michael A. Ivie, Ph.D., F.R.E.S.
> >>
> >> NOTE: two addresses with different Zip Codes depending on carriers
> >>
> >> US Post Office Address:
> >> Montana Entomology Collection
> >> Marsh Labs, Room 50
> >> PO Box 173145
> >> Montana State University
> >> Bozeman, MT 59717
> >> USA
> >>
> >> UPS, FedEx, DHL Address:
> >> Montana Entomology Collection
> >> Marsh Labs, Room 50
> >> 1911 West Lincoln Street
> >> Montana State University
> >> Bozeman, MT 59718
> >> USA
> >>
> >> (406) 994-4610 (voice)
> >> (406) 994-6029 (FAX)
> >> mivie at montana.edu
> >>
> >>
> >> ________________________________
> >> From: Taxacom <taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> on behalf of
> >> Carlos Alberto Martínez Muñoz via Taxacom
> >> <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
> >> Sent: Monday, July 6, 2020 7:14 AM
> >> To: Taxa com <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
> >> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Fwd: Zootaxa taken off of JCR
> >>
> >> Dear Taxacomers,
> >> I don't care about the JIF or about Zootaxa not getting it anymore.
> >> The JIF is unscientific as it is based on a logical fallacy. By not
> >> getting it, Zootaxa has been released from its chains, even if
> >> unwillingly. All the whining for having those chains back is
> >> unscientific as well, and it evidences how poorly prepared our
> >> community is in some topics of logic and scientific methodology.
> >> Moreover, with so many free-to-publish and free-to-read platinum open
> >> access journals out there, every page published in a paywalled
> >> journal is a disservice to Taxonomy. This is 2020. We have the means
> >> to be better and to do better.
> >> Beyond that, I will not sign an "I support Zootaxa" letter but I
> >> would sign a neutral statement such as "We have reviewed for Zootaxa
> >> and we state that no misconduct related to journal self-citations has
> >> been suggested or demanded from us...". I have never published in
> >> Zootaxa, while I have written three manuscript reviews (about 25
> >> pages) within the last six months. So, if you think that a "no
> >> journal self-citation misconduct"
> >> neutral statement signed by reviewers can be of any use in getting
> >> Zootaxa back to the IF fallacy, you can count with my signature.
> >> Kind regards,
> >> Carlos
> >>
> >> Carlos A. Martínez Muñoz
> >> Zoological Museum, Biodiversity Unit
> >> FI-20014 University of Turku
> >> Finland
> >> Myriatrix <http://myriatrix.myspecies.info/>
> >> ResearchGate profile
> >> <https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Carlos_Martinez-Munoz>
> >> Myriapod Morphology and Evolution
> >> <https://www.facebook.com/groups/205802113162102/>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Taxacom Mailing List
> >>
> >> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
> >> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> >> You can reach the person managing the list at:
> >> taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
> >> http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >>
> >> Nurturing nuance while assaulting ambiguity for about 33 years, 1987-2020.
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Taxacom Mailing List
> >>
> >> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
> >> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> >> You can reach the person managing the list at:
> >> taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
> >> http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >>
> >> Nurturing nuance while assaulting ambiguity for about 33 years, 1987-2020.
> >>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> 
> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu For
> list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> You can reach the person managing the list at: taxacom-
> owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be
> searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
> 
> Nurturing nuance while assaulting ambiguity for about 33 years, 1987-2020.