The aim of every piece of research is to have and theoretical and practical impact and to contribute something to the scientific community and the society. Research impact can have many definitions. According to the Research Impact Academy it unifies “all the diverse ways that research benefits individuals, organisations and nations through increasing effectiveness of public services and policy, improving quality of life and health, or economic benefits”. The European Commission defines it as, “A change or a benefit to the economy, society, culture, public policy or services, health, the environment or quality of life”. The central idea behind the research impact is benefit/effect. This effect however, varies across different disciplines and that makes it extremely complicated for measuring.
“Like nuclear energy, the impact factor is a mixed blessing. I expected it to be used constructively while recognizing that in the wrong hands it might be abused.” - Eugene Garfield, “Journal Impact Factor: A Brief Review”
The term “metrics” or “bibliometrics” originated in the era of print media and was initially used mainly by librarians. Nowadays, we can define metrics as a set of quantitative methods used to measure, track, and analyze print-based scholarly literature. - ALA
“Journal performance is a complex, multidimensional concept that cannot be fully captured inone single metric.” - Henk F. Moed et al.
Metrics have their strengths and weaknesses and you as a researcher should be aware of them. The level of importance which is being assigned to metrics raises concerns about being unfair. Metrics should support the human judgement, not replace it. Here are some of the limitations of using metrics:
Metrics can be grouped into three different categories determined by the outcome they are intended to measure.
