97
Surge in number of ‘extremely productive’ authors concerns scientists (www.nature.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/academia@mander.xyz
7 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 7 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 16 points 2 years ago

Wow, this really is disturbing. Clinical medicine is the last field where we want to see fraud and fudging of numbers.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 12 points 2 years ago

    Here's a really great video on the topic in regard to the head of Havard's astrophysics department.

    https://youtu.be/aY985qzn7oI?si=V7YS5RXstfYoEXc6

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 4 points 2 years ago

    Paul Erdos has entered the chat.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 4 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    anyone care to shed light on how physics authorship practices differ from the others that results in its exclusion?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Agreed, I was a bit confused as to why all of physics is such a blatant outlier. Maybe big experimental physics (e.g. LHC) with their 150+ author papers?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago

    yeah but there are so many types of physics, theoretical and experimental, as well as physics that blend into other fields. Seems like a big field to leave out?

    regardless, my guess is one could easily control for author sizes of team science papers, or filter them out for separate analyses.

    maybe there’s some special authorship culture in physics that warrants this.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent