"Proceedings" typically refer to papers presented at conferences, while "journal articles" are published in academic journals. Journal articles often undergo a more rigorous peer-review process, making them more credible. The weightage varies: journal articles are generally considered more significant due to the thorough review, whereas proceedings might carry less weight but still offer valuable insights from conferences. Weightage depends on your field and the specific context of evaluation.

Proceedings have no value and your data can be stolen if you put it there. Journal articles are the pinnacle, so keep your data confidential until you publish there :)

I agree with Md Sakib Hasan Tumon , but disagree with Andrew Paul McKenzie Pegman . It is not true that "proceedings have no value". Most researchers publish also in proceedings. Proceedings of a thematic conference give a good overview of the state of the art in a certain field of research. A publication in a high-ranking general journal like Nature or Science may not be noted by all researchers in your field. Proceedings give also the possibility to quickly publish results before they are published in a journal and thus to fix priority. Legally, a publication is a publication, be it in a journal or in proceedings. Both give you the right to undertake legal actions against plagiators.

Another question is how a publication in proceedings is regarded when you apply for a position or in a similar process. As Md Sakib Hasan Tumon wrote, this depends on the organization and on the review process. Some proceedings have the same strong review process as journals, and in some journals the peer review is rather weak. Some journals publish also proceedings, in a regular or in a special issue, and they use the same peer review process as for regular papers.

It depends on discipline. In my discipline (botany), we don't tend to publish papers in conference proceedings and focus on peer-reviewed journal papers. Other disciplines (e.g. engineering, computing), have rigorously peer-reviewed written conference proceedings that are held in high esteem.

Wolfgang R. Dick proceedings do not have peer review and there is a high risk of your data being stolen, which is not the case for journal publication. I have never heard of anyone favouring conference proceedings over HI journal articles. And usually conference information is vastly different from what is finally published in journal articles anyway. So I stand by what I said and these days recommend never to attend conferences but instead put the effort into article publication in journals :)

Hello Dr Noor Shaila Sarmin

I can understand the points of both Dr Andrew Paul McKenzie Pegman and Dr Wolfgang R. Dick . I agree with the comment that HI articles are favoured. I note that SOME proceedings are indeed peer-reviewed. Not many, though.

Speaking for myself, I think they are not totally worthless, in the right setting. And sometimes they ARE Pubmed-listed. To me, that is good. In the same way, I also add that some people think letters to the editor are worthless. Again, I think if it is Pubmed-listed and well-read/scientifically-correct, it IS worth the effort for me.

That is particularly relevant for somebody like me when funding is hard to get for any reasonable trial but I want to publicise my opinions - particularly in relation to another publication. Even better if it generates attention in my field or department and it leads to the funding!

It is, as Dr Dan J Blanchon says, very variable according to the field as well.