Publish or perish

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Publish or perish ( English for 'publish or go under') is a common phrase in science , especially at universities. This hyperbola expresses the fact that researchers are exposed to strong informal pressure to publish their results as numerous as possible and in the most respected publishers or specialist journals in order to increase their scientific reputation .

The pressure results from the growing competition for staff positions and research funds, in which the donors often make decisions based on bibliometric criteria. The extension of the often temporary staff positions is often linked to research successes, measured in relevant publications (“Whoever writes, he stays!”). Scientists therefore usually try to contribute to as many publications as possible as main or co- author .

A negative consequence of this profile pressure is the frequent honorary authorship of the heads of research institutes in the natural sciences and the tendency of authors to plagiarize themselves in the humanities .

Effects

Effects on the information market

On the scientific information market , strong publish or perish makes the abundance of publications very confusing and is barely manageable for outsiders. Even large libraries are not in a position to provide anywhere near complete literature on site. This is also due to the fact that the specialization of specialist literature often leads to small editions and high prices.

Effects on Scientists

With strong publish or perish, scientists spend a not inconsiderable part of their time looking through publications in their field, evaluating them by means of peer reviews and looking for publication opportunities for their own work. In doing so, they are often under time pressure and occasionally have to publish interim results that do not stand up to close scrutiny and are later corrected. It also increases the incentive to publish research results from subordinate employees or assistants under their own name. Due to the enormous time pressure and the evaluation criteria, neglect of teaching and study supervision by the scientists is to be expected. In extreme cases, the pressure to publish can lead to active falsification of research results in order to be able to publish them (see Fraud and Falsification in Science ).

Criticism of the preference for quantity

In 1998, in its recommendations to ensure good scientific practice, the German Research Foundation explicitly called on all persons and institutions working in science to prioritize "originality and quality over quantity" when assessing scientific achievements in order to reduce the pressure of the publish or perish . The European Charter for Researchers also states that the assessment of the merit of researchers "should not be based solely on the number of publications".

Countermeasures

In the future, project applicants at the German Research Foundation (DFG) should "only list 5 titles from their own production to prove their personal suitability for working on the proposed company" so that the length of their own list of publications is no longer relevant, at least here should be.

See also

literature

Broadcast reports

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (Ed.): Suggestions for Safeguarding Good Scientific Practice. Recommendations of the commission “Self-regulation in science” . Wiley-VCH, Weinheim 2013, p. 20 ( recommendation 6 ), available online on a website of the German Research Foundation
  2. ^ Publish first - filter later , accessed February 22, 2012