Publication of scientific articles in journals is an important stage in the career of every researcher. It affects scientific reputation, grants, thesis defence and career advancement. Accordingly, the choice of a scientific publication for publication directly affects its success: placing a paper in an unreliable database can negatively affect the reputation of a scientist and lead to the fact that his research will not be quoted in the scientific community. Which databases are considered dubious, and why should they be avoided? In this article, we will go into more detail.
Why is it important to avoid unreliable databases?
Publication in scientific journals is not just a formality, but an important indicator of research quality. If a paper is placed in a publication that is indexed in a dubious database, it can have a number of negative consequences, namely:
- Questionable scientific reputation: databases with opaque indexing policies include journals with low peer-review rates, undermining the credibility of published research.
- Lack of international recognition: articles in unreliable databases are not internationally cited.
- Risk of wasting time and money: publications in such databases may not count towards thesis defence, grants and certification, rendering the invested effort useless.
- Linkage to predatory journals: many dubious databases include predatory publications, publication in which may lead to loss of academic reputation.
RSCI (Russian Science Citation Index)
RSCI – is a Russian scientometric database that indexes scientific publications in various disciplines, and it is quite popular among Russian-speaking researchers. However, it is worth noting that there are debates in the international scientific community about its authority and reliability. A significant part of scientists avoid publishing in RSCI due to a number of factors that indicate its dubiousness.
Why do scientists criticise RSCI?
1. Presence of "predatory" journals
"Predatory" journals are publications that publish articles without proper peer review and editorial control, often charging authors for publication. They do not follow scientific and ethical standards, and their main goal is profit rather than the advancement of science.
One of the reasons for distrust of RSCI is the presence of a significant number of journals of this kind. Many of these publications are included in the RSCI database, which creates problems for the scientific community. This leads to a decrease in the quality of published research, as articles in such journals are often not strictly peer-reviewed and do not meet scientific standards.
In addition, the presence of predatory journals undermines the credibility of the database as a tool for evaluating scientific activity. Scientists and scientific organisations cannot be confident in the objectivity of the information provided by RINC. This, in turn, makes it difficult to use the database to make decisions about funding, promotion or evaluation of research work.
2. Low journal inclusion criteria
Unlike international databases such as Scopus or Web of Science, where journals are strictly selected and must meet high quality standards, RSCI often includes publications with rather dubious reputations.
This leads to the fact that the database includes journals with a low level of peer review, weak editorial policy and minimal requirements for published materials. As a result, RSCI becomes overcrowded with publications that do not contribute to the development of science, but only create the illusion of scientific activity.
3. Lack of recognition by the international community
Publications in scientometric databases play an important role in the career development of scientists. The most recognised in the scientific community are Scopus and Web of Science. Articles published in these databases are taken into account when defending a thesis, receiving foreign funding or grants. These platforms provide scientists with a wide range of opportunities for professional growth in the global arena.
RSCI, on the contrary, is not considered a universal database. This means that publications in it will be listed in a limited number of countries and will not have a high level of international recognition. Therefore, it is important for scholars seeking to grow professionally on a global level to publish in globally recognised databases such as Scopus and Web of Science.
4. Limited geography
RSCI is not an international database because it mainly indexes Russian-language journals, which makes it difficult to disseminate research and reduces the number of potential authors who plan to publish in them.
Index Copernicus
Index Copernicus is a Polish scientometric database created in 1999. It provides information about scientific journals and institutions and evaluates publications with its own index (Index Copernicus Value). As in the case of RSCI, Index Copernicus also has a number of aspects that cause scientists to avoid publishing in this database.
Why do scientists criticise Index Copernicus
1. Non-transparent methodology for calculating indicators
As we noted above, a feature of Index Copernicus is that it has a special metric for evaluating journals from different scientific disciplines, called Index Copernicus Value. However, it is this particular feature that is attracting a flurry of criticism because of the methodology used to calculate the metrics.
Many experts and scientists believe that the algorithms used by the database are not sufficiently valid, and therefore they do not rule out the possibility of overestimating the indicators and distorting the real scientific importance of journals.
2. Low requirements for the selection of journals
Unlike authoritative databases such as Scopus or Web of Science, Index Copernicus has less stringent criteria for inclusion of journals. This allows journals with low quality peer review and ‘predatory journals’ that publish without due diligence to enter the database. As a result, the overall quality of content in the database decreases, which undermines its credibility.
3. Lack of international recognition
As in the case of RSCI, Index Copernicus is not considered a universally recognised database at the international level. Publications in journals indexed in this database are rarely taken into account when evaluating scientific activity according to international standards. This makes them less relevant for researchers oriented towards an international career or participation in major research projects.
Choosing a platform for publication is an important step that directly affects its success and further advancement of a scientist. Publishing in unreliable databases may not only be unhelpful, but also detrimental to one's career.
"Scientific Publications" offers assistance in selecting reliable scientific publications, providing support at all stages of the publication process. If you would like to get a free consultation, please leave your contact details in the form below and our manager will contact you as soon as possible. Together towards new scientific achievements!
