More than 100 institutions and funders worldwide have confirmed that research published in eLife continues to be considered in hiring, promotion, and funding decisions, following the journal’s bold move to forgo its Journal Impact Factor. This confirmation offers reassurance to researchers and highlights growing momentum behind fairer, more transparent models of academic publishing and assessment.
These responses follow a coordinated effort by eLife to clarify how its new publishing model is being received across the academic community, including both academic institutions and funders. In total, over 95% of respondents expressed their support for non-traditional models of research assessment such as eLife’s, with some urging other organisations to do the same. The responses came from a diverse range of institutions from around the world, such as Aarhus University (Denmark), the Academy of Medical Sciences (UK), Caltech (US), King’s College London (UK), and the University of Virginia (US). Besides these organisations, the Chinese Academy of Sciences recently confirmed that it continues to classify eLife as a top-tier journal.
This declaration follows the news that the eLife journal is undergoing significant changes in its indexing status due to its innovative publishing approach. Following discussions with Clarivate about its model, eLife agreed to be partially indexed in Web of Science’s Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI), rather than compromise on its model, which means the journal will no longer receive an Impact Factor.
Rather than viewing this as a setback, eLife sees it as a necessary step in challenging outdated publishing models. The journal continues to be covered in open indexes such as PubMed Central, Europe PMC and OpenAlex, ensuring broad visibility and accessibility for researchers worldwide.
Ashley Farley, Senior Officer of Knowledge & Research Services at the Gates Foundation said: “Web of Science’s decision to pause indexing eLife’s Versions of Record reinforces outdated publishing metrics that hinder innovation. The Journal Impact Factor is an inadequate measure of research quality, and indexers must evolve to support responsible, transparent models like eLife’s. Scientific publishing should prioritize meaningful assessment over arbitrary metrics, and we stand with eLife in advancing a more equitable and open research ecosystem.”
Damian Pattinson, Executive Director at eLife said: “The growing support for open models of research reflects a real shift away from flawed metrics like the Impact Factor. At eLife, we’ve always believed that research should be judged on its own merits, not simply on where it’s published. It’s heartening to see funders and institutions continue to recognise eLife papers in funding and hiring decisions, showing that transparency, rigour and openness are being rewarded, and that the absence of an Impact Factor is no barrier to academic success.”
There is growing support for efforts to improve the assessment of research, reflected by initiatives such as the Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) and the Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment (CoARA) which call for evaluation practices that prioritise the quality and content of research over publication metrics like the Journal Impact Factor.
The signing organisations come from countries across the world including the UK, US, Germany, the Netherlands, India and Singapore. Representatives from a diverse range of state and private universities, members of the Russell Group, League of European Research Universities and more, have confirmed their position on accepting eLife papers for professional considerations.
Sue Hartley, Vice-President for Research and Innovation, University of Sheffield said: “This change will not cause any problems at the University of Sheffield – we recognise that eLife is an innovative publishing model and we are committed to supporting these alternatives to the mainstream models. Also our institutional values are to avoid the use of metrics like Impact Factors in career progression, not least as we are DORA signatories.”
Tim Newton, Dean of Research Culture, King’s College London said: “King’s is a signatory to DORA and is working towards membership of COARA. We are committed to responsible research assessment and so have made adjustments to our appointment and promotion processes to recognise diverse and non-traditional outputs, and to advise against the reliance on metrics.”
The eLife Model for publishing made waves throughout the research community when it was brought to life in January 2023. An alternative way for researchers to publish new findings, the model eliminates accept–reject decisions after peer review and focuses instead on the public review and assessment of preprints, making the research and reviewers’ feedback more useful for authors and readers alike.
Damian Pattinson, Executive Director at eLife continued: “With the global research community increasingly embracing open science, eLife remains confident that its model represents the future of scholarly publishing – one that prioritises scientific quality, transparency, and integrity over outdated prestige metrics.”
eLife is continuing to speak with members of the community and gathering additional perspectives on the use of the Impact Factor and similar metrics in research assessment.
For the latest updates from eLife, sign up to receive our bi-monthly newsletter. You can also follow us on X (formerly Twitter), Mastodon, Facebook or LinkedIn.
Media contacts
Emily Packer
eLife
e.packer@elifesciences.org
+441223855373Sofia Pietrangelo Goulart
April Six
elife@aprilsix.com
+447554014857
About
eLife transforms research communication to create a future where a diverse, global community of scientists and researchers produces open and trusted results for the benefit of all. Independent, not-for-profit and supported by funders, we improve the way science is practised and shared. From the research we publish, to the tools we build, to the people we work with, we’ve earned a reputation for quality, integrity and the flexibility to bring about real change. eLife is supported by the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation, the Max Planck Society and Wellcome. Learn more at https://elifesciences.org/about.
