If the amount of publications is the metric of success we'll see the priority given to amount of papers, decrease of quality, retractions, and predatory publishing that feeds on this. Funding and research time will be wasted. 🧪 #academicsky #neuroscience arxiv.org/abs/2309.15884 - ThreadSky

maciekszul.bsky.social • 520 days ago

If the amount of publications is the metric of success we'll see the priority given to amount of papers, decrease of quality, retractions, and predatory publishing that feeds on this. Funding and research time will be wasted.
🧪 #academicsky #neuroscience
https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.15884

Comments

kbas.bsky.social•517 days ago

Well, this is exactly why MDPI is so successful. The amount of money spent on APCs for journals with dubious peer review in Poland is astounding (most institutions here incentivize gathering “points” instead of making actual science).

gordpennycook.bsky.social•520 days ago

My guess is that if there is any effect of increasing the overall # of papers on people's judgments about what is important, it would more likely be the opposite of that. I.e., as the market is flooded with papers, the importance of quality will increase.

maciekszul.bsky.social•520 days ago

I'd like to think this is more about the principles and incentive structures. The need for a cultural shift to disincentivise the volume itself. Easier said than done, I know.

gordpennycook.bsky.social•520 days ago

I think I see what you mean, but I can't really imagine an alternative. If we value producing work (which, presumably, we must), then it simply follows that we more strongly value producing more work.

Of course, this isn't to say that volume *at the expense* of quality is valued.

gordpennycook.bsky.social•520 days ago

In fact, in a market with a lot of quantity, the value of quality should increase. I feel like people are becoming less interested/impressed by volume (by itself) and are looking for quality.

I wish bluesky had polls!

maciekszul.bsky.social•520 days ago

The volume has a cost of reviewing and writing, which ultimately is a waste of money, so I'm less inclined to "let the market decide" 😁

reid-lab.org•520 days ago

With "quality" being determined by impact, prestige, and other gameable proxies... 😟

gordpennycook.bsky.social•520 days ago

Yes, we'll, fair enough on that point! I actually take that to be a larger problem: People don't seem to appreciate that "quality" is highly subjective. And usually includes both prestige-based proxies and (more simply) "how related is this to my idiosyncratic interests"

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply