Evaluating how we evaluate

Molecular Biology of the Cell

Volumn 23, Issue 17, 2012, Pages 3285-3289

  Vale, Ronald D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; CAREER; CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY; CURRICULUM; EDUCATION; EVALUATION; HUMAN; INFORMATION; LABORATORY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PRODUCTIVITY; PUBLICATION; QUALITY CONTROL; RESEARCH; SCIENCE; SCIENTIST; SHORT SURVEY; TRAINING;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; CAREER MOBILITY; EDUCATION, GRADUATE; PEER REVIEW, RESEARCH; PERIODICALS AS TOPIC; PUBLISHING; RESEARCH SUPPORT AS TOPIC; SCIENCE;

EID: 84865765974     PISSN: 10591524     EISSN: 19394586     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1091/mbc.E12-06-0490     Document Type: Short Survey

References (8)

1. Alberts BM (1985). Limits to growth: in biology, small science is good science. Cell 41, 337-338.
2. Ball P (2007). Achievement index climbs the ranks. Nature 448, 737.
3. Johnston M (2009). Reclaiming responsibility for setting standards. Genetics 181, 355-356.
4. Matthews KR, Calhoun KM, Lo N, Ho V (2011). The aging of biomedical research in the United States. PLoS One 6, e29738.
5. Olson MV (1995). A time to sequence. Science 270, 394-396.
6. Raff M, Johnson A, Walter P (2008). Painful publishing. Science 321, 36.
7. Sauermann H, Roach M (2012). Science PhD career preferences: levels, changes, and advisor encouragement. PLoS One 7, e36307.
8. Simons K (2008). The misused impact factor. Science 322, 165.