IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/spr/sprchp/978-3-319-09785-5_2.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

How Nonsense Became Excellence: Forcing Professors to Publish

In: Incentives and Performance

Author

Listed:
  • Mathias Binswanger

    (University of Applied Sciences and Arts of Northwestern Switzerland)

Abstract

In current academic systems professors are forced to publish as much as possible because they are evaluated and ranked according to the number of their publications and citations in scientific journals. This “publish or perish”-principle results in the publication of more and more nonsense. This tendency can only be stopped by abolishing the currently pervasive competition for publication. In the past, researchers who had nothing to say were not incentivized to publish but nowadays they also have to publish continually. Non-performance has been replaced by the performance of nonsense. This is worse because it results in an increasing difficulty to find truly interesting research among the mass of irrelevant publications. A number of perverse incentives are associated with the competition for publication. This includes strategic citing and praising, endless variation of already existing models and theories, and emphasizing formal and mathematical skills, while deemphasizing the content of a paper. Furthermore, in order to maximize the number of publications, scientists also try to squeeze out as many publications as possible from minor ideas (salami tactics), increase the number of co-authors, try to become ever more specialized in already highly specialized scientific disciplines and, in the most extreme case, just fake experiments and results. Engaging in all these activities is basically a waste of time as it does not foster the advancement of science. Instead, it crowds out the intrinsic motivation of professors and other scientists, which is essential for creativity.

Suggested Citation

  • Mathias Binswanger, 2015. "How Nonsense Became Excellence: Forcing Professors to Publish," Springer Books, in: Isabell M. Welpe & Jutta Wollersheim & Stefanie Ringelhan & Margit Osterloh (ed.), Incentives and Performance, edition 127, pages 19-32, Springer.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:sprchp:978-3-319-09785-5_2
    DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-09785-5_2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Vincent Larivière & Rodrigo Costas, 2016. "How Many Is Too Many? On the Relationship between Research Productivity and Impact," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-10, September.
    2. Ting Zhou & Rob Law & Patrick C. Lee, 2021. "Exploring Sustainable Measurements of Academic Research: How Do Faculty Members in Teaching-Oriented Universities of China Evaluate Good Research in Tourism and Hospitality?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-20, October.
    3. Timur Gareev & Irina Peker, 2023. "Quantity versus quality in publication activity: knowledge production at the regional level," Papers 2311.08830, arXiv.org.
    4. Denis Kosyakov & Andrey Guskov, 2022. "Reasons and consequences of changes in Russian research assessment policies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(8), pages 4609-4630, August.
    5. Becker, Albrecht & Lukka, Kari, 2023. "Instrumentalism and the publish-or-perish regime," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    6. Le, Thanh & Pham, Hanh & Mai, Sau & Vu, Ngoc, 2022. "Frontier academic research, industrial R&D and technological progress: The case of OECD countries," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:sprchp:978-3-319-09785-5_2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.