Does the early career ‘publish or perish’ myth represent an opportunity for the publishing industry?
Does the early career ‘publish or perish’ myth represent an opportunity for the publishing industry?
复制标题
早期职业生涯中“出版或灭亡”的神话是否代表着出版业的机遇？
DOI：
10.1002/leap.1217
复制
发表时间：
2019
影响因子：
2.8
通讯作者：
G. Dyke
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
G. Dyke
学术界不是一个可以沿着的就业领域，至少在你获得全职大学终身教职之前是这样的（格罗夫，2016）。与此同时会发生什么？如何实现这一目标？在某些情况下，就业发生得很快，直接完成博士学位后，但在其他情况下，它可能需要几十年，有时根本没有。这是一个古老的故事，但每个从外部观察学术界的人都认为他们知道答案：发表或灭亡。换句话说，尽可能多地发表论文，并尽可能地把它们放在最好的期刊上：我知道，我去过那里。我在美国、爱尔兰、英国和匈牙利做了近20年的学术研究。压力可能很大，特别是对早期职业研究人员（ECR，通常是短期合同的博士后研究人员或新任命的学术人员）。然而，研究论文只是故事的一部分，因为研究人员在职业生涯开始时面临的压力实际上是多方面的，取决于领域;从出版业的角度来看，它实际上可以帮助减轻这些压力。这篇短文中描述了一些关于实现这一目标的方法的建议。学术界的就业结构是明显的金字塔形（以及明显的男性主导，另一个时间的讨论）（格罗夫，2016）;有更多的研究生在他们的硕士和博士工作比博士后职位，同样，更多的“博士后”比全职甚至兼职学术职位。这导致了美国大学助教的危机，例如（Altbach & Finkelstein，2015），合格的个人获得两个或更多的助教职位，通常是非常低的兼职工资，希望保持他们的研究，并在一天内获得终身职位或全职职位。这个问题被贴上了危机的标签，仅仅是因为这个关键的职业阶段，无论是教师还是学生，显然没有从任何一个方向得到足够的资金（Altbach & Finkelstein，2015）。学术出版业也在发生变化，这种变化可能是自罗伯特·麦克斯韦早期以来从未见过的。开放获取正在兴起（大约从2007年开始;克雷格，Plume，McVeigh，Pringle，& Amin，2007），研究人员正在获得对出版过程的更大控制。这一变化部分是由供资机构和同行审查文化推动的。欧洲、英国和其他国家的资助机构要求学术作者将其作品放在开放获取渠道（例如OpenAIRE，2018;但请参见Rabesandratana，2018;货车）。
Academia is not an area of employment within which it is possible to just tick along, at least not until you have secured that fulltime tenure-track university appointment (Grove, 2016). What happens in the meantime? How does one attain this goal? In some cases, employment happens fast, straight after completing a PhD, but in others, it can take decades, sometimes not at all. It is an old story, but everyone who looks into academia from the outside thinks they knows the answer: Publish or perish. In other words, try to publish as many papers as possible and try to get them into the best journals possible: I know, I have been there. I have worked for almost 20 years as an academic researcher in the USA, Ireland, the UK, and Hungary. The pressure can be intense, especially on early career researchers (ECRs, usually postdoctoral researchers on short-term contracts or newly appointed academic staff ). research articles is only part of the story, however, as the pressures facing researchers at the beginning of their careers are actually mutifaceted and field-dependent; from the point of view of the publishing industry, it could actually do a lot to help ease these pressures. Some suggestions for the ways that this can be achieved are described in this short article. The employment structure of academia is distinctly pyramid shaped (as well as being markedly male dominated, a discussion for another time) (Grove, 2016); there are vastly more graduate students working on their Masters and PhDs than there are postdoctoral positions and, similarly, vastly more ‘postdocs’ than fullor even part-time academic positions. This has led to a crisis in university teaching assistants in the USA, for example (Altbach & Finkelstein, 2015), where well-qualified individuals take up two or more assistantships, often for very low part-time wages, in the hope of keeping their research going and 1 day securing a tenure track or full-time position. This issue has been labelled as a crisis simply because this key career stage, both for teachers and students, is clearly not being adequately funded from either direction (Altbach & Finkelstein, 2015). The academic publishing industry is also changing in ways perhaps not seen since the early days of Robert Maxwell. Open access is on the rise (since approximately 2007; Craig, Plume, McVeigh, Pringle, & Amin, 2007) and researchers are gaining greater control of the publication process. This change is driven in part by the funding agencies and the culture of peer review. European, UK, and other national funding bodies are requiring academic authors to place their work in open access outlets (e.g. OpenAIRE, 2018; but see Rabesandratana, 2018; Van