Empathy and Grit - Not Just Publication Records - Should Be Considered in Researcher Assessment
Critics of current methods for evaluating researchers’ work say a system that relies on bibliometric parameters favours a ‘quantity over quality’ approach, and undervalues achievements such as social impact and leadership.
It is testament to the machinery of science that so much has been learned about covid-19 so rapidly. Since January the number of publications has been doubling every 14 days, reaching 1,363 in the past week alone. They have covered everything from the genetics of the virus that causes the disease to computer models of its spread and the scope for vaccines and treatments. What explains the speed? Much as in other areas of life, covid-19 has burnt away encrusted traditions.
At this time of crisis, it is more important than ever for scientists around the world to openly share their knowledge, expertise, tools, and technology. Scientists must also openly share their model code so that the results can be replicated and evaluated.
Between Fast Science and Fake News: Preprint Servers Are Political
Preprints servers have become a vital medium for the rapid sharing of scientific findings. However, this speed and openness has also contributed to the ability of low quality preprints to derail public debate and feed conspiracy theories.