Researchers' individual publication rate has not increased in a century

PLoS ONE

Volumn 11, Issue 3, 2016, Pages

  Fanelli, Daniele ^a   Larivière, Vincent ^b,c  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITÉ DU QUÉBEC À MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CAREER; CONTROLLED STUDY; HUMAN; PRODUCTIVITY; PUBLICATION; SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE; SCIENTIST; WEB OF SCIENCE; HISTORY; PERSONNEL; SCIENCE; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; WRITING;

AUTHORSHIP; HISTORY, 20TH CENTURY; HISTORY, 21ST CENTURY; HUMANS; PUBLICATIONS; RESEARCH PERSONNEL; SCIENCE;

EID: 84961233938     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0149504     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Garfield E. What is the primordial reference for the phrase 'publish or perish'? Scientist. 1996; 10 (12):11-. WOS:A1996UP42100007.
2. Siegel D, Baveye P. Battling the Paper Glut SCIENCE 2010; 329(5998):1466-. doi: 10.1126/science. 329.5998.1466-a PMID: 20847251
3. De Rond M, Miller AN. Publish or perish - Bane or boon of academic life? J Manage Inq. 2005; 14 (4):321-9. doi: 10.1177/1056492605276850 ISI:000233244000005.
4. Hicks Diana, Wouters Paul, Waltman Ludo, Sd Rijcke, Rafols I. Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics. Nature. 2015; 520:429-31. doi: 10.1038/520429a PMID: 25903611
5. José-Alain S. Quality Versus Quantity: Assessing Individual Research Performance. Sci Transl Med 3 (84):84. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3002249
6. Statzner B, Resh VH. Negative changes in the scientific publication process in ecology: potential causes and consequences. Freshwater Biology. 2010; 55(12):2639-53. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2427. 2010.02484.x WOS:000283725300016.
7. Bertamini M, Munafo MR. Bite-Size Science and Its Undesired Side Effects. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2012; 7(1):67-71. doi: 10.1177/1745691611429353 WOS:000298857700008. PMID: 26168425
8. Buela-Casal G. Pathological publishing: A new psychological disorder with legal consequences? Eur J Psychol Appl Legal Context. 2014; 6(2):91-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ejpal.2014.06.005 WOS:000337990900006.
9. Ware JJ, Munafo MR. Significance chasing in research practice: causes, consequences and possible solutions. Addiction. 2015; 110(1):4-8. doi: 10.1111/add.12673 WOS:000346699700002. PMID: 25040652
10. Hayer C-A, Kaemingk M, Breeggemann JJ, Dembkowski D, Deslauriers D, Rapp T. Pressures to Publish: Catalysts for the Loss of Scientific Writing Integrity? Fisheries. 2013; 38(8):352-5. doi: 10.1080/ 03632415.2013.813845 WOS:000323369100006.
11. DFG Modifies Rules for Publication Lists [Internet]. Berlin: DFG Press and Public Relations; 2014. Available from: http://www.dfg.de/en/service/press/press-releases/2014/press-release-no-08/index. html
12. Protocol for Research Assessments in the Netherlands, (2015).
13. Franzoni C, Scellato G, Stephan P. Changing Incentives to Publish. Science. 2011; 333(6043):702-3. doi: 10.1126/science.1197286 WOS:000293512100024. PMID: 21817035
14. Pautasso M. Publication Growth in Biological Sub-Fields: Patterns, Predictability and Sustainability. Sustainability. 2012; 4(12):3234-47. doi: 10.3390/su4123234 WOS:000324044100003.
15. Miller AN, Taylor SG, Bedeian AG. Publish or perish: academic life as management faculty live it. Career Dev Int. 2011; 16(4-5):422-45. doi: 10.1108/13620431111167751 WOS:000306873200006.
16. van Dalen HP, Henkens K. Intended and Unintended Consequences of a Publish-or-Perish Culture: A Worldwide Survey. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol. 2012; 63(7):1282-93. doi: 10.1002/asi.22636 WOS:000305233900002.
17. Tijdink JK, Vergouwen ACM, Smulders YM. Publication Pressure and Burn Out among Dutch Medical Professors: A Nationwide Survey. Plos One. 2013; 8(9):6. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0073381 WOS:000324515600097.
18. Pautasso M. Worsening file-drawer problem in the abstracts of natural, medical and social science databases. Scientometrics. 2010; 85(1):193-202. doi: 10.1007/s11192-010-0233-5 ISI:000280947400015.
19. Fanelli D. Negative results are disappearing from most disciplines and countries. Scientometrics. 2012; 90(3):891-904. doi: 10.1007/s11192-011-0494-7
20. Munafo MR, Attwood AS, Flint J. Bias in genetic association studies: effects of research location and resources. Psychological Medicine. 2008; 38(8):1213-4. WOS:000258058300017. doi: 10.1017/ S003329170800353X PMID: 18598581
21. Fanelli D, Ioannidis JPA. US studies may overestimate effect sizes in softer research. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2013; 110(37):15031-6. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1302997110 WOS:000324125100053. PMID: 23980165
22. Fronczak P, Fronczak A, Holyst JA. Analysis of scientific productivity using maximum entropy principle and fluctuation-dissipation theorem. Physical Review E. 2007; 75(2). doi: 10.1103/PhysRevE.75. 026103 WOS:000244532000006.
23. Wuchty S, Jones B, Uzzi B. The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. SCIENCE. 2007; 316(5827):1036-9. doi: 10.1126/science.1136099 PMID: 17431139
24. Fanelli D, Glänzel W. Bibliometric evidence for a Hierarchy of the Sciences. Plos One. 2013;in press.
25. Pontille D. La signature scientifique: Une sociologie pragmatique de l'attribution. Paris, FR: CNRS; 2004.
26. Gingras Y. The Transformation of Physics from 1900 to 1945. Physics in Perspective. 2010; 12 (3):248-65.
27. Fanelli D. Do Pressures to Publish Increase Scientists' Bias? An Empirical Support from US States Data. Plos One. 2010; 5(4). WOS:000276952500026.
28. Papatheodorou SI, Trikalinos TA, Ioannidis JPA. Inflated numbers of authors over time have not been just due to increasing research complexity. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008; 61(6):546-51. doi: 10.1016/j. jclinepi.2007.07.017 WOS:000256164700006. PMID: 18471658
29. Fanelli D, Costas R, Larivière V. Misconduct Policies, Academic Culture and Career Stage, Not Gender or Pressures to Publish, Affect Scientific Integrity. PLoS ONE. 2015; 10(6):e0127556. doi: 10.1371/ journal.pone.0127556 PMID: 26083381
30. Debackere K, Glanzel W. Using a bibliometric approach to support research policy making: The case of the Flemish BOF-key. Scientometrics. 2004; 59(2):253-76. doi: 10.1023/b:scie.0000018532.70146.02 WOS:000220003600006.
31. Kaushal SS, Jeschke JM. Collegiality versus Competition: How Metrics Shape Scientific Communities. Bioscience. 2013; 63(3):155-6. doi: 10.1525/bio.2013.63.3.3 WOS:000322048200003.