Every year, the publication day of journal impact factors can trigger the "Butterfly Effect" in the academic circle of our country. From this point of view, China's academic circles have been "addicted" to it, and the "addict" index has risen sharply; In contrast, in Europe and the United States and other countries with strong scientific and technological innovation ability, academic circles are relatively calm. Yuan Fang could not help but ask: "why is this?" The old DIGE replied, "there must be a mystery here."

The reason why Chinese scholars pay too much attention to impact factors is that many scientific research institutes use it to evaluate scholars' scientific research achievements, which naturally involves the issue of personal interests, that is, the amount of "money". For the evaluation of "hat", title and reward, the evaluation experts value the number of SCI papers, and the number of influence factor points. This kind of unhealthy tendency has not been effectively curbed after the introduction of the "five only" policy.

Scholars think that impact factor is an index to evaluate the influence of a journal, not an index to evaluate the value of a paper. In my opinion, the papers published in high impact factor journals are mostly "hot" research, especially the "gimmick" articles. For example, some scholars have published eye-catching papers on NS, such as "typhoons may be an important mechanism for triggering earthquakes", "the present earthquakes may be the aftershocks of historical giant earthquakes", but these are "Oolong" understandings based on the unclear mechanism of earthquakes, which are wrong interpretations. These papers published in high impact factor journals not only have no academic value, but also easily mislead the latecomers.

A foreign bull once pointed out to the point: "the quality of scientific research lies in the scientists who can put forward interesting problems and solve them. In any case, your country (China) and my country need to solve the problem of science fact."; Your concerns are all wrong. You all focus on publishing articles in journals with high impact factors. This is actually a kiss of death. What you should really care about is truth in science. " In this regard, 2018 Nobel laureate Ben Shuyou also stressed: "first class work often overturns the conclusion, so it is not welcomed by people. The review experts will put forward a lot of negative opinions, so that your articles can not be published on the top; Articles catering to the trend of the times are easier to be accepted, otherwise it will take a long time to be recognized. "

As we all know, one of the important purposes of scientific research is to find the essential laws describing the evolution of natural phenomena. Therefore, whether a scientific research result (theory, the same below) has important value depends on: (1) objectivity (correctness)（ 2) Meaning.

How to evaluate the correctness of a scientific research result? According to the accepted scientific standards, it is necessary to: (1) satisfy the logical self consistency（ 2) Through empirical study. For the former, scholars who know the paradigm of scientific research should be familiar with it, otherwise they should go dancing in the square; For the latter, many people with vested interests, pretending to be confused, use the influence factor as a "bean bag" to replace the "hard currency" of empirical evidence. This is all caused by "the bottom decides the head".

Usually, after a scientific research result is published, it needs a long-term test process to judge its "authenticity" and to know its significance. Mr. Hua Luogeng advocated "early report and late evaluation" also said this truth. If any scientific research results can not pass the long-term logical check and empirical test of peers, it is impossible to be recognized by peers, which has little to do with the journal level of the results published.

The reason why many scholars in China start up quickly is that they have published many papers in high impact factor journals. They mislead the academic circle by saying "the higher the impact factor, the greater the value of the paper", that is, to replace the long-term test with the impact factor. This led to the spread of the idea of eager for quick success and instant benefit in the academic circles, and led to the prevalence of impetuous and boastful in the academic circles. We should give a slap in the face to this erroneous trend of thought. In recent years, the implementation of the "five only" new policy at the national level is the key to stop losses in time. If it can be carried out firmly, the future is promising.

If one day, the academic circles in China only focus on the value of the paper itself rather than the level of the journal, just like the European and American academic circles, when they are indifferent to the impact factors of the journal, it shows that the academic circles in China really understand the essence of scientific research. In this way, more reasonable scientific research evaluation policy can take root, truly outstanding scientific research achievements can emerge, and China can become a powerful country of scientific and technological innovation from a big country of papers.