Table of Contents
The past is important in understanding the present.
People who have an investment or interest in an organization or project
Moral quandaries
Status of case
Talking
Original: Negotiation
Paraphrased: Bargaining
This colllocation is growing in popularity every day. Nearly everyone who is involved in science has encountered it or heard of it. What does this mean? What is it that everyone is talking about? It is such an important problem. How can it be solved? These questions were what I was looking for while I was working on the assignment.
Wikipedia says that “Publish or perish” is a phrase used to describe academic pressure to quickly publish academic work in order to maintain or advance one’s career. Although it may sound innocent, scientists know that publishing in academic journals is crucial. There are many purposes for it. First, it is the most visible outcome of a scientist’s work. It is also the best way for you to share your data with scientists. But many scientists are being pressured to publish research data. Historical backgroundThe pressure on scientists to publish their research data is increasing. It is evident that there are good intentions behind the roads to hell. Henry Oldenburg the secretary of Royal Society was first to unite all scientific discoveries. Royal Society, a well-known independent scientific academy>> was established in the UK in 1660. Henry Oldenburg published his Philosophical Transactions in 1665 to provide a monthly overview on all the new information. The journal was initially published by Henry Oldenburg as a personal endeavor. In 1752, however, the Philosophical Transactions became a Royal Society official journal. Henry Oldenburg still leads the publication. It has gained popularity with scientists over the years, so it is now separated into Philosophical Transcripts A (and Philosophical Transcripts) B. It is divided into two sections: Biological and physical sciences.
StakeholdersPublishing research is a very complicated process with a variety of stakeholders. They are involved at almost every stage. In the issue of Publish Or Perish>>, it is important to understand the relationships between major stakeholders. It is essential to fully understand the goals and motivations of all stakeholders in order to resolve the issue.
Publishers are key stakeholders. They are responsible for the reputation of the journal, its income and circulation. Publishers are responsible for publishing only trend-setting, scientifically sound papers. This would attract media attention. The process involves the efforts and collaboration of an editor, an associate editor, reviewers, and others. Publishers who have a journal with a high Impact factor are more demanding.
An editor is a person who helps to publish a paper. He views an article as scientifically sound. This is done by evaluating the article in light of a list of criteria. Publishers must ensure that all research is relevant and does not take any data for granted. Unavoidable side-effects may occur if the paper is not accurate. Staple is an example of such a situation.
The author is the one most affected by the Publish-or-perish>> situation. Publication is a great way to share data and receive positive recognition. However, being published can lead to stress and unhealthy work environments.
Another stakeholder is the academic institution. To attract funding for research and financial support, institutions need to be seen as a credible institution due to budgetary pressures. They must be recognized in prestigious journals to achieve this.
The Scientific Society is a stakeholder that has the greatest benefit. The principle of Publish or Perish>> results in a huge amount of research that is published, giving society access to vast amounts of new knowledge.
Ethical dilemmasThere are many stakeholders which can lead to ethical dilemmas. Each stakeholder is free to choose whether they want to do the right things or seek out the benefits. The pressure imposed by Publish Or Perish>> poses high risks to scientific integrity. There are many possible outcomes. Salami slicing is one of the most common. Cherry picking is another. Scientists may cut up data to get more publications on a particular topic. They also tend to manipulate data to select the most relevant data to their research findings. Multiplication is also a problem. Scientists may join articles as guest authors or co-authors in order to earn more publication credits. Scientists’ integrity can be further compromised. In order to increase citations, scientific journals tend to publish more positive results. This is known as Publication bias.
This should not be overlooked. Many cases are where peer reviewers recommend rejecting a paper. But, within a short time, his/her group publishes an almost identical paper to the one they rejected. The peer reviewer’s group is the one that publishes the paper on the subject. It is evident that unethical behavior creates problems and complicates the problem. Each stakeholder can suffer severe consequences. Scientists could lose their reputation and, in turn, their research positions. Journals could lose publication dates or profits due to unethical conduct. Even worse, journals may lose credibility if their papers contain incorrect data. It is also important to mention the scientific society. This is where the real tragedy lies. Many people believe that all published data is reliable. Inaccurate data leads to inept readers. This will cause wasted time, money, and frustration if the date is incorrect.
Status of the CaseOver the past few decades, the scientific community has been very affected by the issue of Publish Or Perish>>. Students and researchers are faced with different ethical dilemmas because of the system. Many cases involve Ph. Ph.D. students were caught using fraudulent methods to obtain a publication to complete their degree. Students can mess up their data as well as scientists who are more experienced. In addition to this, people are often forced to chase down publications and citations. This can lead to them being more stressed and more vulnerable to making mistakes. Some attempts were made to implement a new system for evaluating scientific research papers. The new system uses different criteria, including social impact. However, the ranking of scientists is still determined by the number and quality of their publications in high level journals. In general, things like the significance of the work for society and economic are not considered. This is not the only reason why governments, foundations, as well as private companies, use scientific quality to evaluate research fundings.
DiscussionI believe that the system of “Publish or Perish” is more than a vestige of the past. It also shows how a good intention can get out of control. The system that was supposed to rank or estimate scientists and identify those who are successful became a sword that hangs over all scientists around the world, ready to punish anyone who doesn’t respect the system. Scientists must only have positive research data that is paired with results from experiments in order to be successful in the Publish-or-perish>> system. But it’s very hard to avoid mistakes. It is okay to make mistakes. Scientist integrity is at risk from the Publish or perish>> dilemma. Worst is that human beings are all susceptible to weaknesses, such as the need for money and glory. against people themselves. This situation is not win-win. I do not believe that there is a winner. The stakeholder who makes a bad decision about one of the other stakeholders can cause serious problems for all involved.
The Scientific Society must be especially concerned about the Publish Or Perish>> issue. It is imperative that stakeholders be aware of the causes and effects, as well as their challenges. If we don’t, there will be no changes in the immediate future. I believe there is a rational way to solve the problems created by “Publish-or-perish.” Scientists should propose a new system for benefit sharing and evaluation. Based on the past experiences, the new system could be developed. Reasonable ranking is based on publications. The evaluation factor that determines the rating factors is Publish or perish>>. Society impact, however, is derived from the previously mentioned failed system. While we can’t predict the future, it is important to solve the “Publish or Perish” problem for the benefit of scientific integrity and credibility.
Comments are closed.