Hi H,

It depends on many factors. Often, universities set criteria to maintain tenure or performance review. An average tends to be around 1-3 per year. Other criteria to add are place in the author order and quality of journal i.e. Q-ranking, Impact factor. Another factor is level of contract. In most cases, a professor would be expected to maintain a higher level of yearly-three-yearly period publications that a lower level lecturer.

Hi H,

It depends on many factors. Often, universities set criteria to maintain tenure or performance review. An average tends to be around 1-3 per year. Other criteria to add are place in the author order and quality of journal i.e. Q-ranking, Impact factor. Another factor is level of contract. In most cases, a professor would be expected to maintain a higher level of yearly-three-yearly period publications that a lower level lecturer.

Commonly, 2 first-authored journal publications are required. However, promising assistant professors I have seen published at least three first/sole authored journal articles and more per year. One professor (he got a department chair) published 5 first-authored articles per year. I think that 2 is common, 3 is promising, 4 is excellent, and 5 is exceptional.

The only thing I can say that one should keep on publishing regularly.

I think two or three papers is enough to publish per year

As long as the publication addresses a problem I set a target of four articles each year.

In my opinion, two high-quality and innovative articles per year are More valuable than ten weak papers.

There is no such standard quantity. Many factors should be considered. A researcher with many collaborations with quality research in the same field can publish more than 5. Particularly a senior professor in a well-established institute surrounded by a bunch of virile students and collaborators, which is not a rare case, will not find difficulty in producing a donzen papers. But for starters and those with limited facilities like us, 1 good article can be an honourable achievement. So let's not set a universal bar.

I think the important thing is the strength and integrity of the publications, not the number

I agree with Dean Whitehead

Depends. It is not a standard number of publications.

There is no minimum standards! However, at least one publication a year would be good enough.

H. Naderpour - I think that there should be no standard number of publications per year (specially journal papers) for a researcher? Overall, quality of the paper and journal reputation matters. One good quality paper published in a reputed journal is worth than 10 published in substandard journals. It is believed that some researchers are unusually prolific publishers, appearing as an author on as many as 70 scientific papers a year—or about every 5 days a paper.

I think two to three research papers published in high impact / rating journals are good enough in a year.

I believe three papers in a year are sufficient for a scientist.

Very very critical situation for serious researchers who may not work in a group. Brilliant and novel scientific research output generally takes a long time to publish. I am afraid such quality publication is not possible in 1-2 years'' time. Only fear is that the selection panel for career advancements/project approvals etc may not appreciate the quality of information generated for the reasons best known to the panel members. Under such circumstances researchers are left alone to decide their fate of research.

I think between 1 and 4 papers per year is OK. The most productive and active academic should at most publish 4 papers per year.

It depends on a lot of things like the integrity of the publication and the rank of the journals, but I think between 1-2 journal papers (Q2) and 2 conference papers is ok for a researcher.

I think the standard varies from one researcher to another. Sometimes, it is hard to predict when a manuscript will gain acceptance. Even after acceptance, some journals delay the production process. So, the final year of publication may entirely differ from author's initial expectation. All you need: Work as much as you can. Publish as much as you can.

I acknowledge Dr Hussain's answer.

I think a researcher is required to publish a minimum of one article yearly in high impact journal..

Unless you are contributing to other publications which you are not lead, one publication is possible. It however depends on the field of specialization, some may require more than a year to obtain quality and reliable data worth publishing.

I don't think a number of paper(s) is usually specified rather, the points acquired over time before promotion. In a University that I know, 4 points is usually specified. A lead author receives 1 point in a journal of >2 impact factor (IF) while others receive 0.5 each. Thus, in total required points, one must have 4 before his or her promotion date.

i agree with most contributors that quality is all that matters and hence need not put emphasis over frequency of publication, Even though most institutions may inadvertently put such standards.

May be five papers

Best Regards H. Naderpour

Quality is more important than quantity. And so a maximum of two journal articles from an individual researcher per year may be okay.

I will join the flow that, quality is more important in paper output. As much as it is okay to ensure that at least every year a researcher focuses on not more than two research articles, it is also necessary to contribute to other papers from team members in works that we may have done with them or in those in which they seek our technical expertise. Combining the effect of team play with self led efforts, one may end up a year having about 5 papers or more. Remember each of these lead authors must focus on quality.

It depends, may be one in high impact Journal and another in local or national journal

H. Naderpour

one is mandatory with high impact factor journal.