3 ms·
The current scientific research apparatus is more about being first than about being correct or thorough. A paper that gets out early means more citations, and
by glitchc 3y ago
The current scientific research apparatus is more about being first than about being correct or thorough. A paper that gets out early means more citations, and many of the faculty sit on the editorial boards, and are able to suggest/enforce specific citations during the review process. Academics aren't fully to blame for this, it's just how the incentives are set up in the system. Tenure and promotions are increasingly based on h-index; a measure of impact based largely on the number of citations.
- rollcat 3y agoIt's hard to estimate the impact of an idea in the same way that you can estimate the impact of an investment (stock is a number that goes up or down). You're right that the current incentive system might be to blame, but a simplistic metric will be gamed just as easily - what would you propose?
- glitchc 3y agoHonestly, I don't think any metric can fix it, and don't have any easy solutions to this. The problem is larger than academia, more endemic to society. The root cause is society's values have changed. Previously, prestige mattered for something. Now, people would rather listen to pop stars than learned individuals, and wealth is the only metric that matters. As a result, typical professions that used to confer prestige, and for which prestige was supposed to be just reward, such as a professor, a medical doctor, a judge, are now mainly pursued for pecuniary reasons (money, job security). And because they're not doing it for prestige, they don't necessarily care about being right/correct. Playing the game to maximize the revenue streams is paramount. I happen to know a number of faculty who are quite proud of their multiple revenue streams. This would be unthinkable for an academic 50 years ago.