4 ms·
>powerful central government force that doesn't understand research productivity [1]* I'm sure they understand it. But their goal in doing this isn't really r
by ineedasername 3y ago
>powerful central government force that doesn't understand research productivity
[1]*
I'm sure they understand it. But their goal in doing this isn't really research productivity (though it would be a happy byproduct) it's to obtain prestige, or its illusion. And/or be able to tell the people of your country how great you're doing. "Our country is a rising powerhouse in field X, in the top 3 in the world and still rising!"
It's internal propaganda. And externally targeted towards populations of other countries unfamiliar with the academic publishing system, which is most people. So for example the vast majority of people in the US that hear these claims by China, which are then echoed in click-bait headlines or simply taken at face value after a journalist checks something like the various HCR lists.
It can even be propaganda, not from China, but from other countries. One of the studies was funded by the US State Department to an Australian group, thus obscuring a primary influence on the results of the study.
Then even a single newspaper article can spark a dozen others citing it, propagating the message. All of these directly or indirectly rely on citations to support their headlines [2]
https://www.science.org/content/article/china-rises-first-place-most-cited-papers https://www.science.org/content/article/china-rises-first-pl...
https://www.wsj.com/articles/american-universities-continue-to-falter-in-world-rankings-china-rising-11665535646 https://www.wsj.com/articles/american-universities-continue-...
https://money.usnews.com/investing/news/articles/2023-03-02/china-leads-us-in-global-competition-for-key-emerging-technology-study-says https://money.usnews.com/investing/news/articles/2023-03-02/...
https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE72R6FQ/ https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE72R6FQ/
[1] The quality of this comment will be measured by metrics that I made up myself.
[2] https://www.reuters.com/technology/china-leads-us-global-competition-key-emerging-technology-study-says-2023-03-02/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/china-leads-us-global-com...
*This comment was funded by a grant from its author.
- maxglute 3y ago>isn't really research productivity (though it would be a happy byproduct) Or the goal is research productivity and citation gaming is just the unhappy byproduct. Yes some motivated actors to playup PRC capabilities (ASPI/US think tanks) exist, but unless you think every western index on science and innovation, controlled for quality of citations (like Nature) are incentivized/coordinated to carry water for PRC's massive increase in research productivity in the last few years, then the parsimonious answer is PRC research productivity has gotten really good and world leading in some domains. Which should not be surprising because what OP fails to understand incentivizing citation gaming is a smart way to incentivize output, FAST, and at PRC scale output quantity has quality of it's own. If system spams research, and start off with only 2/10 good research, but leader is 3/5 good research, then PRC has nearly caught up. Refine to 3/10 and there's parity. Refine system to 4/10 and PRC leads. Emphasis being fast because PRC started focusing on seriously improving tertiary and R&D/S&T ~10 years ago and the goal was to develop capabilites fast by customary overproduction. You don't get that by slow careful growth, you do that by incentivizing easy KPIs everyone in sector can coordinate around and the product of said KPI is ENOUGH good research after byproduct of citation gaiming. Having a bunch of chaff leftover to get wheat is the point.