Surge in number of ‘extremely productive’ authors concerns scientists (www.nature.com)

submitted 10 months ago by fossilesque@mander.xyz to c/academia@mander.xyz

6 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 7 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] livus@kbin.social 16 points 10 months ago

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

[-] Ashyr@sh.itjust.works 11 points 10 months 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

[-] MacGuffin94@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

Paul Erdos has entered the chat.

[-] inspxtr@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

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

[-] swicano@kbin.social 2 points 10 months ago

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?

[-] inspxtr@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months 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.

this post was submitted on 11 Dec 2023

93 points (100.0% liked)

Academia

766 readers

1 users here now

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Sal@mander.xyz