Nowadays, I noticed that some scientists who did their research just for a job promotion with no focus on innovation and social benefits. they include their names even in published research that they didn't run as a compliment from other peers. I think that this kind of scientist may restrain the progress of the scientific production. what about your opinion?
I think that, in the example you give, there are typically two kinds of people receiving credit. The first, although not having run the research, receives the credit as a compliment - as you say. However, that person may well have tutored, assisted, supervised and mentored members of the research team on this or past projects. They may also be a person who peer-reviews papers, putting in a lot of work for the field. I can understand why they receive the compliment.
However, there is the second type, sometimes a 'big name' that adds to the credibility of the paper but has done nothing and/or has demanded that their name is added. Or the ones who have just done nothing or very little but are included just because they are on a list.
It is the second type, in my opinion, that devalues scientific integrity and is totally undeserved. One way it could be addressed is to try to change this attitude that a 'big name' on a paper has more value. It is the content of the paper and the quality of the research that we should be looking at no matter how lowly the names at the top of the page.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Publisher