Physicist Proposes New Way to Rank Scientific Output

Publications in peer-reviewed journals are the yardstick by which academic scientists compare their work with their colleagues. But is the best measure of a scientist’s worth the total number of his or her published papers? Or the average quality of those papers, based on the number of times they are cited or the reputation of the journals in which they are published?

If you want to include this story in your blog, copy and paste this formatted text:

<p><a href="http://www.physorg.com/news7971.html">Physicist Proposes New Way to Rank Scientific Output</a></p> <p>Publications in peer-reviewed journals are the yardstick by which academic scientists compare their work with their colleagues. But is the best measure of a scientist’s worth the total number of his or her published papers? Or the average quality of those papers, based on the number of times they are cited or the reputation of the journals in which they are published?</p>