Collegiality versus competition: How metrics shape scientific communities

BioScience

Volumn 63, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 155-156

  Kaushal, Sujay S ^a   Jeschke, Jonathan M ^b,c  

^a Bldg 142   (United States)

^b TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

^c CARY INSTITUTE OF ECOSYSTEM STUDIES   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84875324661     PISSN: 00063568     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1525/bio.2013.63.3.3     Document Type: Note

References (9)

1. Acuna DE, Allesina S, Kording KP. 2012. Future impact: Predicting scientific success. Nature 489: 201-202.
2. Brischoux F, Cook TR. 2009. Juniors seek an end to the impact factor race. BioScience 59: 638-639.
3. Fischer J, Ritchie EG, Hanspach J. 2012. Academia's obsession with quantity. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 27: 473-474.
4. Lajtha K, Baveye PC. 2010. How should we deal with the growing peer-review problem? Biogeochemistry 101: 1-3.
5. Lawrence PA. 2007. The mismeasurement of science. Current Biology 17: R583-R585. (Pubitemid 47189706)
6. Likens GE. 2001. Biogeochemistry, the watershed approach: Some uses and limitations. Marine Freshwater Research 52: 5-12. (Pubitemid 32116656)
7. McDade LA, Maddison DR, Guralnick R, Piowar HA, Jameson ML, Helgen KM, Herendeen PS, Hill A, Vis ML. 2011. Biology needs a modern assessment system for professional productivity. BioScience 61: 619-625.
8. McPeek MA, et al. 2009. The golden rule of reviewing. American Naturalist 173: E155-E158.
9. Smith MF, Eviner VT, Weathers K, Uriarte M, Ewing H, Jeschke JM, Groffman P, Jones CG. 2005. Creating individual awareness about Responsible Conduct in Research: A case study of one institution's approach for researchers and administrators. Journal of Research Administration 36: 21-25.