Using journals' impact factors severely over- and under-estimates researcher's scholarly impact

Deep Dive podcast: Learn why using a journal’s impact factor severely over- and under-estimates the scholarly impact of individual articles (and individual researchers). For example, the 2020 Academy of Management Journal’s JIF was 10.19, but 63% of articles (i.e., 100 of 160) have been cited fewer than ten times, and just 24% (i.e., 38 of 160) accounted for at least 50% of all citations. Also, learn why and how we make invalid inferences when using impact factors to evaluate the impact of individual scholars by examining the 81 management researchers who received the Academy of Management “Distinguished Award for Scholarly Contributions to Management” and also those recognized as Clarivate Web of Science “Highly Cited Researchers.” How can we measure the impact of articles and researchers better-without confusing levels of analysis? This podcast answers this question.
For more details, get article: Ramani, R. S., Aguinis, H., & Coyle-Shapiro, J. A. 2022. Defining, measuring, and rewarding scholarly impact: Mind the level of analysis. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 21(3): 470-486. doi.org/10.546...