scholarly journals Publication pressure threatens the integrity of palaeontological research

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nussaïbah Raja ◽  
Emma Dunne
Keyword(s):  
Publication Pressure

scholarly journals Science and University Politics

2020 ◽  
pp. 199-224
Author(s):  
Jaap Bos
Keyword(s):  
Modern Science ◽  
List Type ◽  
Scientific Practices ◽  
Teaching Ethics ◽  
Political Factors ◽  
Know How ◽  
University Politics ◽  
Replication Crisis ◽  
Perverse Incentives ◽  
Publication Pressure

After Reading This Chapter, You Will: Understand how political factors impact modern science Appreciate in what ways the replication crisis endangers the values of science Know how publication pressure and perverse incentives challenge scientific practices See why teaching ethics requires reactive, proactive, and reflexive education

Publication Pressure Questionnaire

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. K. Tijdink ◽  
Y. M. Smulders ◽  
A. C. M. Vergouwen ◽  
H. C. W. de Vet ◽  
D. L. Knol
Keyword(s):  
Publication Pressure

Factors Affecting the Intercultural Adaptation Process of International Students: A Case Study of Vietnamese Postgraduate Students at a Tertiary Institution in Taiwan

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 163-175
Keyword(s):  
International Students ◽  
Adaptation Process ◽  
Tertiary Institution ◽  
Adjustment Problems ◽  
Postgraduate Students ◽  
Factors Affecting ◽  
Intercultural Adjustment ◽  
Intercultural Adaptation ◽  
Publication Pressure

The study was conducted to explore challenges Vietnamese postgraduate students were confronted with during their intercultural adaptation process in Taiwan. The participants (N = 28) were administered an open-ended questionnaire, probing into different aspects of their intercultural adjustment, namely academic, psychological and sociocultural issues. Findings indicated regarding academic life, the sojourn students encountered language barriers (both in English and Chinese), new pedagogical approach, examination and publication pressure. Other adjustment problems involved daily communication with the local, unfamiliar diet, homesickness, perceived discrimination, and few activities for international students. Implications for relevant stakeholders were discussed. Received 14th March 2018; Accepted 11th April 2019; Revised 25th April 2019

Why do you publish? On the tensions between generating scientific knowledge and publication pressure

2017 ◽  
Vol 69 (5) ◽  
pp. 529-544 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nora Hangel ◽  
Diana Schmidt-Pfister
Keyword(s):  
Science Studies ◽  
Knowledge Generation ◽  
Career Stage ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Publish Or Perish ◽  
Direct Question ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Publication Pressure ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Postdoctoral Researchers

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine researchers’ motivations to publish by comparing different career stages (PhD students; temporarily employed postdocs/new professors; scholars with permanent employment) with regard to epistemic, pragmatic, and personal motives. Design/methodology/approach This qualitative analysis is mainly based on semi-structured narrative interviews with 91 researchers in the humanities, social, and natural sciences, based at six renowned (anonymous) universities in Germany, the UK, and the USA. These narratives contain answers to the direct question “why do you publish?” as well as remarks on motivations to publish in relation to other questions and themes. The interdisciplinary interpretation is based on both sociological science studies and philosophy of science in practice. Findings At each career stage, epistemic, pragmatic, and personal motivations to publish are weighed differently. Confirming earlier studies, the authors find that PhD students and postdoctoral researchers in temporary positions mainly feel pressured to publish for career-related reasons. However, across status groups, researchers also want to publish in order to support collective knowledge generation. Research limitations/implications The sample of interviewees may be biased toward those interested in reflecting on their day-to-day work. Social implications Continuous and collective reflection is imperative for preventing uncritical internalization of pragmatic reasons to publish. Creating occasions for reflection is a task not only of researchers themselves, but also of administrators, funders, and other stakeholders. Originality/value Most studies have illuminated how researchers publish while adapting to or growing into the contemporary publish-or-perish culture. This paper addresses the rarely asked question why researchers publish at all.

scholarly journals Perceptions of publication pressure in the Max Planck Society

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (10) ◽  
pp. 1029-1030
Author(s):  
Charley M. Wu ◽  
◽  
Benjamin Regler ◽  
Felix K. Bäuerle ◽  
Martin Vögele ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Max Planck ◽  
Max Planck Society ◽  
Publication Pressure

scholarly journals How the publish-or-perish principle divides a science: the case of economists

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hendrik P. van Dalen
Keyword(s):  
Latent Class ◽  
Faculty Members ◽  
University Ranking ◽  
Faculty Position ◽  
Publish Or Perish ◽  
Teaching Administration ◽  
Work Pressure ◽  
Unethical Practices ◽  
Publication Pressure ◽  
Ranking Position

AbstractThe publish-or-perish principle has become a fact of academic life in gaining a position or being promoted. Evidence is mounting that benefits of this pressure is being countered by the downsides, like forms of goal displacement by scientists or unethical practices. In this paper we evaluate whether perceived work pressure (publishing, acquisition funds, teaching, administration) is associated with different attitudes towards science and the workplace among economists working at Dutch universities. Publication pressure is high and is related to faculty position and university ranking position. Based on a latent class analysis we can detect a clear divide among economists. Around two third of the economists perceives that this pressure has upsides as well as serious downsides and one third only perceives upsides and no downsides. Full professors see more than other faculty members the positive sides of the publish-or-perish principle and virtually no downsides. These different perceptions are also reflected in their appreciation of the academic work environment.

scholarly journals Van-e védelem a másolás ellen? Gondolatok a plágiumról

2015 ◽  
Vol 156 (50) ◽  
pp. 2052-2053 ◽  
Author(s):  
András Schubert ◽  
Wolfgang Glänzel
Keyword(s):  
Text Analysis ◽  
Scientific Literature ◽  
Professional Knowledge ◽  
The Other ◽  
Analysis Software ◽  
Simple Task ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Publication Pressure

There are at least two reasons why more and more cases of suspected plagiarism are perceived in the scientific literature. On one hand, the ever strengthening publication pressure makes easier for the authors, reviewers and editors to infringe or overlook this serious ethical misdemeanor; on the other hand, with the development of text analysis software, detecting text similarities became a simple task. The judgement of actual cases, however, requires well-grounded professional knowledge and prudent human decisions. Orv. Hetil., 2015, 156(50), 2052–2053.

scholarly journals Personally perceived publication pressure - Revising the Publication Pressure Questionnaire (PPQ) by using work stress models

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tamarinde Laura Haven ◽  
Marije de Goede ◽  
Joeri K. Tijdink ◽  
Frans J. Oort
Keyword(s):  
Principal Component ◽  
Maslach Burnout Inventory ◽  
Impact Factors ◽  
Convenience Sample ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Component Solution ◽  
Academic Researchers ◽  
Publication Pressure ◽  
As Stress ◽  
Stress Models

The emphasis on impact factors and the quantity of publications, intensifies competition between researchers. This competition was considered an incentive to produce high quality work, but there are unwanted side-effects of this competition like publication pressure. To measure the effect of publication pressure on researchers, the Publication Pressure Questionnaire (PPQ) was developed. Upon using the PPQ, some issues came to light that motivated a revision. We constructed two new subscales using the facet method. We administered the revised PPQ to a convenience sample together with the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) and the Work Design Questionnaire (WDQ). To assess which items best measured publication pressure, we carried out a Principal Component Analysis (PCA). Reliability was sufficient when Cronbach’s alpha > 0.7. Finally, we administered the PPQr in a larger, independent sample of researchers to check the reliability of the revision. Three components were identified as ‘stress’, ‘attitude’ and ‘resources’. We selected 3 x 6 = 18 items with high loadings in the three-component solution. Based on the convenience sample, Cronbach’s alphas were 0.83 for Stress, 0.80 for Attitude, and 0.76 for Resources. We checked the validity of the PPQr’s by inspecting the correlations with the MBI and the WDQ. Stress correlated .621 with MBI’s emotional exhaustion. Resources correlated .498 with relevant included WDQ subscales. To assess the internal structure of the PPQr in the independent reliability sample, we conducted principal components analysis. The three-component solution explains 50% of the variance. Cronbach’s alphas were 0.80, 0.78, and 0.75 for Stress, Attitude, and Resources, respectively. We conclude that the PPQr is a robust and reliable instrument to measure publication pressure in academic researchers from all disciplinary fields. The PPQr can help identify which academic researchers are at risk for developing burnout symptoms. The PPQr could also be beneficial for policy makers and research institutions to assess the degree of publication pressure in their institute.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document