Abstract

This letter is a call to the Spanish scientific authorities to abandon current research evaluation policies, which are based on an excessive and indiscriminate use of bibliometric indicators for nearly all areas of scientific activity. This narrow evaluation focus is especially applied to assess the individual performance of researchers. To this end, we first describe the contexts in which the journal impact factor (JIF) and other bibliometric indicators are being used. We then consider the toxic effects of this abuse of indicators. Finally, we outline some significant transformations and initiatives being introduced in various academic fields and regions of the world. These international initiatives offer alternatives to bibliometrics that can improve evaluation processes, and we urge political leaders in Spain to adopt and develop them.

Abstract

This umpteenth statement, although doubtlessly brilliant, arrives late and badly, since it not only insists on a strategy that has not worked but also avoids building the consensus that is necessary in the Spanish-speaking bibliometric community, a community that may not be mustered in this way to the extent that it remains far from a unanimous position. There will be conflicting interests, academic debate, and various publications, but action must finally occur via powerful lobbies, direct interviews with those responsible, and alternative, practical approaches. This letter, beyond its correct evaluations, does not propose real or viable scenarios, and not even short- or medium-term transitions, much less strategies that would be sustainable over time.