Simulation of the New Proposed Method by CAPES for the Qualis 2017-2020 Classification of the Brazilian Archives of Biology and Technology

Abstract

Superior, CAPES) for the classification of Qualis 2017-2020 by tracing the path that led to the B3 stratification attributed to the journal Brazilian Archives of Biology and Technology (BABT). Data collection was based on the evaluation of articles published between 2017 and 2018 to obtain the Lattes curricula of the author(s). Other goals were to verify their participation in stricto sensu postgraduate programs recognized by CAPES; to identify the program's evaluation area according to CAPES; and to establish the association of authors/coauthors with their respective countries. Overall 199 articles were identified, with 897 authors/co-authors, 359 of which are associated with Brazilian institutions. A participation of at least one Brazilian author/co-author could be verified in 69 articles, out of which 60 had at least one professor affiliated to a stricto sensu postgraduate program recognized by CAPES. There was professors linked to 26 of the 49 CAPES evaluation areas, whereby the highest number of publications were Food Science and Agrarian Sciences I, both with 16 HIGHLIGHTS  CAPES' proposed method for the Qualis classification of BABT was simulated.

Simulation of the New Proposed Method by CAPES for the Qualis 2017-2020 Classification of the Brazilian Archives of Biology and Technology - Part II

“…It can be seen that Agrarian Sciences I is the main area of BABT, with 81 occurrences of publications without redundancy by professors of SSGP recognized by CAPES, differing from the study carried out previously [9], in which it was not possible to identify precisely which area constitutes the main area in the journal's classification, given that the results showed a tie between the areas of Agrarian Sciences I and Food Science.…”

“…On the other hand, there are numerous aspects that may generate uncertainties at first, such as: (i) the adoption of a single criterion for evaluation may be questionable, leading to negative results for already consolidated journals [12]; (ii) the universalization of evaluation and classification criteria for journals associated with the decentralization of evaluation may be inappropriate, as it is proposed by a single area. Such proposal may be valid for unidisciplinary journals, but not for journals that cover a significant number of areas [9] and; (iii) if the metric used to classify Brazilian and international journals is the same, considering the much lower citation rates of Brazilian journals, the tendency is that these journals will be classified in the lower strata of Qualis [13].…”

“…First, internationalization represents a factor that has been valued by CAPES during its process of reformulating the evaluation SSGP, even considering exclusively publications of professors associated to SSGP recognized by CAPES, disregarding publications by foreign Brazilian Archives of Biology and Technology. Vol.66: e23220956, 2023 www.scielo.br/babt authors, which constitute an absolute majority of the total number of publications in several journals, especially in those considered of excellence [9]. Second, the current version of Qualis influenced the choice of journals by researchers, since several journals benefited from such classification ended up publicizing their classification in their official websites in what, in theory, would be the new Qualis [13].…”

“…This method resulted in an unofficial classification, named by CAPES as the circulating version of Qualis, baptized by the academic community as Qualis 2019 or "leaked-Qualis", which was sectioned into eight strata calculated at equal intervals of 12.5 percentile points. Journals with percentiles above the median made up strata "A" (A1, A2, A3 and A4), and journals with percentiles below the median made up strata "B" (B1, B2, B3 and B4) [8,9].…”

“…According to Schifini and Rodrigues [1], scientific publications are the bridge between researchers around the world, becoming synonymous of quality, both for those who write them and for those who publish them. In this context, the journal Brazilian Archives of Biology and Technology (BABT) was classified as B3, which did not match the criteria set out in the aforementioned official letter, motivating a study comprising the journal's productions in the period 2017 and 2018, which its conclusion demonstrated that the assigned rating was inconsistent [9].…”