(This is not really a question, but it seems that questions are the only kind of comment that can be left on PeerJ articles, so I couched it as one.)

I think that the following paper is also very relevant to what is being discussed here, and I wanted people reading your paper to have the link: Brembs, Björn, Katherine Button and Marcus Munafò. 2013. Deep impact: unintended consequences of journal rank. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 24 June 2013..

As they say: "In this review, we present the most recent and pertinent data on the consequences of our current scholarly communication system with respect to various measures of scientific quality (such as utility/citations, methodological soundness, expert ratings or retractions)."

Hope this is helpful.