Diagnoses Paper-inflation:
As a result, our conferences are full of boring, narrow papers which have little or no long term impact. [...] This will clearly lead to a “death spiral”.
Of course, moving in this direction will force administrators to work harder. They can no longer just count publications; instead they will have to figure out the actual impact of any given job applicant. In our opinion, this is a good thing to do.
I think the "administrators can no longer just count publications" is way
off. Jochen
Gläser mentioned
that there was a case where administrators had a linear factor (e.g. 3
) to
convert the value of books publised to journal publications.
I don't understand why open source isn't embraced more/yet. It is mentioned in the community section of the seattle report. Why not focus on the combination of:
This combination should ensure that neither irrelevant "we worked a lot to produce a graph"-publications nor unscientific but popular open source projects game this system (at least not in this way / that easily).
Fochler and Sigl: Anticipatory Uncertainty: How Academic and Industry Researchers in the Life Sciences Experience and Manage the Uncertainties of the Research Process Differently shines an interesting light onto this.