this post was submitted on 29 May 2024
1810 points (99.0% liked)

Science Memes

11047 readers
2884 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] candybrie@lemmy.world 51 points 5 months ago (27 children)

Does 80 technical papers in 2.5 years seem kind of off to anyone else? That's more than a paper every 2 weeks. Is there really time for meaningful research if you're publishing that often? Is he advising a lot of students? If that's the case, is he providing the attention generally needed for each one? Is his field just super different than mine?

[–] jol@discuss.tchncs.de 43 points 5 months ago (7 children)

In acamedia you usually get your name on most papers where you help a bit. And if you're the boss, you get your name on papers without even helping but perhaps supplying space, material, budget.

[–] candybrie@lemmy.world 26 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (6 children)

I've been in academia. My field required a "significant intellectual contribution" to the research and the writing, so no putting your name on papers if you just supplied space/material/budget. You can get an acknowledgement for that, not an authorship credit.

[–] ormr@feddit.de 16 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

And which reviewer or publishers verifies how "significant" a contribution is beyond seeing some initials matched with tags like "visualization" or "experimental design"? That's right, nobody. It's not even remotely traceable who did what if you're a reviewer.

Academia is full of fraud and people trying to secure their share of credit because in academia it's all about names, as the twitter exchange above illustrates so profoundly. And the other driver for the sad state of academia is of course having the quantity of published papers as the most important criterion for academic success. The more papers, the more citations, the bigger your name will become. It determines your chances of getting funding and therefore your career. If you want to make a career in science you have little options but to comply with this system.

[–] candybrie@lemmy.world 10 points 5 months ago (1 children)

That's kind of the point I was making.

[–] ormr@feddit.de 2 points 5 months ago

Sorry, my irony detector must be malfunctioning.

[–] Lets_Eat_Grandma@lemm.ee 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Academia is full of fraud

Everything, everywhere is corrupt.

[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago

Everything Everywhere All Corrupt

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (22 replies)