Jan 26 2015 Published by odyssey under Careers
If you're publishing multiple (closely-related or not) reviews per year, you're doing it wrong.
10 responses so far
And yet I know this dude...... High primary productivity and repetitive reviews out the bazinga. Probably why he's been on the Highly Cited list since forever.
Also, aren't there people who have to meet annual productivity goals? Where five papers in one year don't make up for a zero the year before? So they may have different contingencies.
I was invited to write a review for a prominent journal in my field. I just couldn't find the mental energy to do it at all. I can't imagine how people write a bunch.
DM, as you tweeted, ratio of primary data papers to reviews is critical. I was sub-blogging about someone in my sub-field whose ratio appears to be about 1:2 - primary:review. Maybe worse.
"I am a thought leader", eh?
Is this guy at a British University perchance? I have a few of these in my subfields of interest.
Nope. US uni. Sometimes I get the impression he's published more reviews than the rest of the sub-field combined.
And yes on the "thought leader" aspirations.
There are some obnoxious practices at work though. I've published more reviews than I care to, largely because they've been sprung on me. You speak at a specialist conference and suddenly there's a special issue of some journal arranged by the organizers that wants 5000 words.
Reviews are for pussys. I'm all about the book chapter. Thats where the real sewage flows.
Pussies? I think pussys. But surely not pussy's.
Site Admin | Theme by Niyaz
Pondering Blather Copyright © 2017 All Rights Reserved