English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

You have probably seen the New Qualis, which is being the hot topic of the moment, haven’t you? It had actually an excellent article published in the “O Estado de São Paulo” under the suggestive title ‘Ranking puts Brazilian scientific journals at risk of extinction’ [1]. In an interview, you quoted ‘not agreeing with some changes such as the restriction on the number of journals that can be classified in a specific area.’ Viva! Mr. President has started to see the problem! Unfortunately you used a criticizing tone extremely mild, in order to minimize, merely as a detail, this which is the meanest intention of the Committee of Alienated Numerologists (CNA). Forgive me, but I’ve made up this acronym because acronyms are in vogue and also because I refuse to recall the official name of this Committee. As for the decision of only 25% of the journals in the world are worthy to enter Qualis A, the Alienated established, perhaps unnoticeably, this curious and inevitable mathematical consequence: the limit for each area was established by numerology, with no relation whatsoever with the reality of the respective scientific production. Just one example: in Medicine I, the limit impact factor is 3.7 because 25% of the world magazines in the subject categories of JCR included in Medicina I have the impact factor ≥ 3.7. What about the relation with Brazilian scientific production in Medicine I? None! As a matter of fact, those who actually get to read the basic document of the CNA will be able to confirm the total lack of preoccupation regarding this “insignificance”. This fact is so important that it becomes necessary to emphasize. Through this arbitrary numerology the Alienated Gentlemen have created a table that is good for Afghanistan, Haiti, U.S.A., Switzerland, and Rhuanda. Also for Mars, Jupiter or Neptune. Or just in case we freak out and decide to go on a Helenistic buff frenzy, to Ares, Zeus and Poseidon! In other words, it is good for no one! It is just a fetiche! To the Best of my knowledge, as they say, nobody had disclosed this aspect of the New Qualis. If you prefer a technical position, here we go: the construction base of the Qualis A is methodologically vicious: it is almost a statistical impossibility (P< 1050, something like the probability of going wrong in the hypothetical basketball match further illustrated) that the first quartile of the periodicals of EACH of the SUBJECT CATEGORIES of the ISI might be the adequate limit for EACH ONE of the areas of Brazilian science. But not all is lost, for we have gotten an important ally: we welcome you with open arms, dear Mr. President, to play in our team. Maybe even being our captain: Like in our good old-school times, let’s hit the street holding a banner with a good slogan reading: “DOWN WITH THE NEW QUALIS! BRING BACK REALISM!” But the problem does not run out in this alienated numerology! No one argues that the old Qualis is outdated and it is necessary to create a new type of rating for Brazilian scientific publications. Excuse me for repeating something that you have proudly quoted, our science has grown considerably in quality and geometrically in quality. And I would like to add that when it comes to quality, we are the Number One of BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, China). In quantity; the Number Four. But when comparing our quality with those of the First World, there is still a long way to go. We publish more than Switzerland, but the quality falls way behind. How do we measure these things? The old Qualis used the Impact Factor as a quality rating, because there was no choice: at that time there was the only available rating mean. And if to our eyes in 2009, the old Qualis looks low we need to remember that it was realistic when it was first created. And because it was realsitic it was reachable. And there is why it did not distort the evaluation. On the contrary, it contributed to increase the quality of the Brazilian science, and that we owe to CAPES! Thank you and your pals! But in this new millennium, there are new ratings. And the technologic information is light-years ahead of the times of the old Qualis. And here is the second major problem of the new Qualis: the evaluation of Brazilian

O novo Qualis, que não tem nada a ver com a ciência do Brasil: carta aberta ao presidente da CAPES