Give Researchers a Lifetime Word Limit. Martinson, B. C. 550(7676):303.
Give Researchers a Lifetime Word Limit [link]Paper  doi  abstract   bibtex   
Brian C. Martinson imagines how rationing the number of publications a scientist could put out might improve the scientific literature. [Excerpt] A dirty truth pervades academic publishing: we write papers to gain credit in an academic marketplace. [...] The purpose of authorship has shifted. Once, its primary role was to share knowledge. Now it is to get a publication – 'pubcoin' if you will. Authorship has become a valuable commodity. And as with all valuable commodities, it is bought, sold, traded and stolen. Marketplaces allow unscrupulous researchers to purchase authorship on a paper they had nothing to do with, or even to commission a paper on the topic of their choice. 'Predatory publishers' strive to collect fees without ensuring quality. [...] Imagine a world in which each scientist is allotted a fixed number of words that they can publish over her or his career. [...] Lifetime limits would create a natural incentive to do research that matters. [...] Ideally, limits would encourage researchers to ensure that research is conducted with the utmost care. (Imagine losing part of your allotment of words to a paper that is discredited or even retracted.) This would provide a counterweight to the pressure to publish quickly for priority. It would also lead to increased value being placed on concision and clarity, improving readability and efficiency. Honorary authorship would become much less attractive. [...] Limits would of course bring a new set of problems: if we don't also address our own cognitive biases and penchant for compelling narratives, word limits could exacerbate tendencies to publish only positive findings, leading researchers to explore blind alleys that others' negative results could have illuminated. Researchers might skimp on a full description of caveats, previous work and methods. [...]
@article{martinsonGiveResearchersLifetime2017,
  title = {Give Researchers a Lifetime Word Limit},
  author = {Martinson, Brian C.},
  date = {2017-10},
  journaltitle = {Nature},
  volume = {550},
  pages = {303},
  issn = {0028-0836},
  doi = {10.1038/550303a},
  url = {http://mfkp.org/INRMM/article/14460332},
  abstract = {Brian C. Martinson imagines how rationing the number of publications a scientist could put out might improve the scientific literature.

[Excerpt] A dirty truth pervades academic publishing: we write papers to gain credit in an academic marketplace. [...] The purpose of authorship has shifted. Once, its primary role was to share knowledge. Now it is to get a publication -- 'pubcoin' if you will. Authorship has become a valuable commodity. And as with all valuable commodities, it is bought, sold, traded and stolen. Marketplaces allow unscrupulous researchers to purchase authorship on a paper they had nothing to do with, or even to commission a paper on the topic of their choice. 'Predatory publishers' strive to collect fees without ensuring quality. [...] Imagine a world in which each scientist is allotted a fixed number of words that they can publish over her or his career. [...] Lifetime limits would create a natural incentive to do research that matters. [...] Ideally, limits would encourage researchers to ensure that research is conducted with the utmost care. (Imagine losing part of your allotment of words to a paper that is discredited or even retracted.) This would provide a counterweight to the pressure to publish quickly for priority. It would also lead to increased value being placed on concision and clarity, improving readability and efficiency. Honorary authorship would become much less attractive. [...] Limits would of course bring a new set of problems: if we don't also address our own cognitive biases and penchant for compelling narratives, word limits could exacerbate tendencies to publish only positive findings, leading researchers to explore blind alleys that others' negative results could have illuminated. Researchers might skimp on a full description of caveats, previous work and methods. [...]},
  keywords = {*imported-from-citeulike-INRMM,~INRMM-MiD:c-14460332,~to-add-doi-URL,predatory-publishers,publication-bias,publish-or-perish,research-management,research-metrics,science-ethics},
  number = {7676}
}

Downloads: 0