m******o
发帖数: 571 | 1 PLoS ONE's impact factor has been discussed for a while, now it finally came
out.
4.351 is not too bad. |
E**********y
发帖数: 991 | 2 It's very good considering the wide scope of this journal. If the IF were
based on biology related papers, the IF would be even higher. I would say
this journal in general is at JBC level |
t****p
发帖数: 1504 | 3 不是一直有人说这个杂志不要算影响因子吗？
四点多很不错啊。
came
【在 m******o 的大作中提到】
: PLoS ONE's impact factor has been discussed for a while, now it finally came
: out.
: 4.351 is not too bad.
|
w***a
发帖数: 4361 | 4 出来不到三年啥杂志都木有IF吧
【在 t****p 的大作中提到】
: 不是一直有人说这个杂志不要算影响因子吗？
: 四点多很不错啊。
:
: came
|
i*****l
发帖数: 51 | |
E********8
发帖数: 22 | 6 We often make a fun that PLOS ONE has a negative impact factor.haha...
there is a funny video about PLOS ONE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcOAKkvLMeQ&feature=related
came
【在 m******o 的大作中提到】
: PLoS ONE's impact factor has been discussed for a while, now it finally came
: out.
: 4.351 is not too bad.
|
l******u
发帖数: 936 | 7 not really, but the log ratio of its IF is negative.
【在 E********8 的大作中提到】
: We often make a fun that PLOS ONE has a negative impact factor.haha...
: there is a funny video about PLOS ONE
: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcOAKkvLMeQ&feature=related
:
: came
|
m******o
发帖数: 571 | 8 log(4.35100) = 0.638589083
Why is it negative?
【在 l******u 的大作中提到】
: not really, but the log ratio of its IF is negative.
:
|
a****o
发帖数: 1786 | 9 he was talking about the video.
according to that video, IF of PLoS1 is 0.0001.
【在 m******o 的大作中提到】
: log(4.35100) = 0.638589083
: Why is it negative?
|
N*S
发帖数: 783 | 10 haha, that's sad but hilarious...
【在 E********8 的大作中提到】
: We often make a fun that PLOS ONE has a negative impact factor.haha...
: there is a funny video about PLOS ONE
: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcOAKkvLMeQ&feature=related
:
: came
|
|
|
a***e
发帖数: 1010 | 11 I saw the video again. it is 10^-5
【在 a****o 的大作中提到】
: he was talking about the video.
: according to that video, IF of PLoS1 is 0.0001.
|
n***w
发帖数: 2405 | 12 the video is so funny.
but I don't think plos one is that bad... |
l******u
发帖数: 936 | 13 我说的是在前面 youtube 视频里的， 视频里显示是 10 负5次方，所以我才说log值是
负数。
【在 m******o 的大作中提到】
: log(4.35100) = 0.638589083
: Why is it negative?
|
W****C
发帖数: 1937 | 14 我觉得之所以这么样是因为写作者引用的时候只会考虑是不是支持自己的观点， 支持
的里面选比较新的，所以POLSONE这样的也能上去啦 |
m******o
发帖数: 571 | 15 影响因子计算2007-2008在2009年的引用率，这对任何杂志都是一样的呀？其他杂志历
史悠久，但是论文一样是新的呀？
【在 W****C 的大作中提到】
: 我觉得之所以这么样是因为写作者引用的时候只会考虑是不是支持自己的观点， 支持
: 的里面选比较新的，所以POLSONE这样的也能上去啦
|
n***c
发帖数: 7400 | 16 前几期nature上有人骂这个杂志是水货，accept every submission to make as much money as they can 还有一个
plos
immunology的编辑出来辟谣，说plos系列他这个版块审稿还是很严的，哈哈，笑死，反
正我是不投plos系列的。 |
C*******e
发帖数: 4348 | 17 你这样说让那些版上有PLoS One的同学们情何以堪啊
much
money as they can 还有一个
【在 n***c 的大作中提到】
: 前几期nature上有人骂这个杂志是水货，accept every submission to make as much money as they can 还有一个
: plos
: immunology的编辑出来辟谣，说plos系列他这个版块审稿还是很严的，哈哈，笑死，反
: 正我是不投plos系列的。
|
b*****l
发帖数: 9499 | 18 看好 plos 系列啊，上升期。nature 子刊系列已经红过了，IF 增长速度已经放缓。
much money as they can 还有一个
【在 n***c 的大作中提到】
: 前几期nature上有人骂这个杂志是水货，accept every submission to make as much money as they can 还有一个
: plos
: immunology的编辑出来辟谣，说plos系列他这个版块审稿还是很严的，哈哈，笑死，反
: 正我是不投plos系列的。
|
O******e
发帖数: 4845 | 19 PLoS One的接受率大概是70%，有正规和严格的审稿程序。
【在 C*******e 的大作中提到】
: 你这样说让那些版上有PLoS One的同学们情何以堪啊
:
: much
: money as they can 还有一个
|
S****r
发帖数: 982 | 20 Nod
【在 W****C 的大作中提到】
: 我觉得之所以这么样是因为写作者引用的时候只会考虑是不是支持自己的观点， 支持
: 的里面选比较新的，所以POLSONE这样的也能上去啦
|
|
|
m********a
发帖数: 12601 | 21 PLOS不是不要钱么？
莫非是只收投稿人的钱？
much money as they can 还有一个
【在 n***c 的大作中提到】
: 前几期nature上有人骂这个杂志是水货，accept every submission to make as much money as they can 还有一个
: plos
: immunology的编辑出来辟谣，说plos系列他这个版块审稿还是很严的，哈哈，笑死，反
: 正我是不投plos系列的。
|
n***c
发帖数: 7400 | |
W*****o
发帖数: 1780 | 23 Plos One is very fast, we chose Plos one because we do not want to spend too
much time dealing with the reviewer and editor. I submitted one manuscript
to another journal, after three months no response even we wrote emails and
called editor many times. Finally I retracted it and submitted to Plos One,
two weeks later I received reviewer's comments and one month later it was
accepted. Plos One is good at speed. I really hate reviewer or editor
delayed the publication. |
