3 ms·

> and I think we all know what.... No, I haven’t got a clue.

• sriram_malhar 2y ago
  I think GP's point is that academics who have 20+ papers are basically running a paper mill; there is no way they are participating meaningfully in the papers their names appear in
  • tom_ 2y ago
    But they don't say, so how can we tell? I'm not going to be vague with my comment: best thing to do in this sort of case is not to engage.
    • sgt101 2y ago
      The person says some of what I think much better than me: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2025/02/17/does-authorship-mean-anything-when-academic-papers-are-simply-citable-tokens/ https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2025/02/17/do... I am afraid that there is massive and systematic and harmful fraud in research: https://www.science.org/content/article/potential-fabrication-research-images-threatens-key-theory-alzheimers-disease https://www.science.org/content/article/potential-fabricatio... as only one example. There are many many others. Very little work in entire fields is actually valid. I think that the way that authorship is currently practiced has a lot to do with this fraud. Academics with ethics and goodwill can no longer effectively police the system. A large number of academics do not even want the system to be policed.