That is true Catherine. Many academics have 'bountiful' and 'lean' years. I have had some years where I've had 10+ articles published and others none. That said, are we talking full articles in international peer-reviewed journals here? In years where I have had no article publications - I usually have had several other publications in other forms i.e. edited books and/or book chapters. Sometimes a focus on one means publication format means leaner times with others.

Back to your point again per year. Many universities, when measuring publication 'outputs' (often for contractual commitments) will often look for the 'average' publications over a time period i.e. 3-5 years. That way, if say the expectation is that an academic should 'average' two publications per year - they may have had three one year, none another year and three the following year. They would then still meet the 'average' criteria over three years.

To publish is important but it does not mean that those who published more compared to those with one or none are better. One good paper may suffice to shadow hundreds. Publishing anything is also not good as after all its your name there and once in public it is reflecting something, actually much. However, strive to publish as a beginner or else.

Dean, i agree that most Universities look for 'average' publications over a time period i.e. 3-5 years. In my University it is after a period of three years for academic grade consideration and Quarterly for performance contract.

Dear Catherine,

The publish or perish policy, which is now much in vogue in many Universities all over the world wants us to publish a lot. Quantity matters more than quality. Because of this, we have, I think, many dispensable publications, journals, artifical fractures, fragmentation, distortion of another's viewpoints, and the like.

This happens more in the social sciences that in the natural sciences. if the number of pusblished papers was a criterion of scientific progress, then psychology, for examplw, would be the queen of sciences This, we know, is not the case.

As an academic, I prefer to pubish a few good papers than a lot of say, poor papers. Overall, I published two papers a year, not in predatory journals, but in international peer-reviewed journals, which have no charging costs for the authors. I judge it to me immoral to have to pay for having our papers and hard work published.

KInd regards,

Orlando

Wau, few good papers and a personal statement: ''judge it to me, immoral to have to pay for having our papers and hard work published''. It takes a lot of courage and effort to get there Orlando.