Re: Number of times cited in a CV?
I was surprized how fast this thread died. Maybe it died because the = basic value of citation frequency is so obvious to most scientists. =20 It is wrong to simply dismiss the value of this measure because it has = some error associated with it. What better measure do we have that our = work is influencing a field than the fact that people are citing it. = Where a paper is published does provide some information, but the review = process is certainly variable. What our friends and mentors are saying = about it also provides some information, again with a great deal of = uncertainity. =20 =20 I seem to have a different experience than some. I have often been on = search committes that composed of at least some people who really can't = "recognize stellar contributions to the literature" , especially since = this literature may be in an entirely different field. Why wouldn't = they benefit from some additional sorts of information. =20 In the end our legacies as academic scientists will largely be the = students we have trained, and the influence our ideas have on the = progress of Ecology as a Science. Size of grants and number of = publications might be one way to measure this. Is that really a more = reliable measure than the frequency with which your publications are = cited in other published works? =20 =20 =20 =20 Daniel A. Soluk, Assoc. Prof. Dept. of Biology University of South Dakota 414 East Clark St. Vermillion, SD 57069 ph. 605 677-6172 =20 From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news on behalf of = Malcolm McCallum Sent: Thu 8/23/2007 9:17 AM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: Number of times cited in a CV? Although we are currently forced to play this game, everyone should read this article that was first brought to my attention by Ken Dodd. If you want a pdf copy, email me. It is excellent reading for those in administrative posts. The article slams the issue of citation ratings providing a solid arguement as to why they degrade the scientific = process rather than promote it. Lawrence, P.A. The mismeasurement of science. Current Biology = 17(15):R584. On Thu, August 23, 2007 7:25 am, William Silvert wrote: > Alas, Susan is attacking one of the most prized strategies for = achieving > fame in science -- publish papers with errors, which will draw = critical > responses and generate tons of citations. > > Bill Silvert > > - Original Message - > From: "Susan Kephart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2007 8:01 AM > Subject: Re: Number of times cited in a CV? > > >> Dear Jonathan: >> >> Below is my quick response on "cited X time" in CV's. Others may >> view this practice differently of course, depending on the >> institution perhaps: >> >> I've been on search committees for many years, and have seen this >> practice increasingly in recent years in applications for tenure >> track positions in liberal arts institutions that emphasize both >> research and teaching. For our searches at least, I consider it an >> unnecessary use of the applicant's time and don't recall that topic >> ever coming up as a positive in a committee meeting. At the pre- >> interview stage, my colleagues and I tend to be much more interested >> in the caliber of the paper, the rigor of peer review for the journal >> it is published in, comments on that person's research from faculty >> mentors/recommenders whose own work is highly regarded, and most >> importantly , the ability of the author to write cogently about the >> significance of his or her research, as well as how that research >> might be continued and developed in the future. A few strong papers >> in excellent journals on a CV, and a pdf of an exemplar paper can go >> a long way towards shifting someone's application up a notch than how >> many times a paper is cited IMHO . . Folks on the search committee >> should be discriminating enough to recognize stellar contributions to >> the literature without being alerted to citation frequency, or look >> it up for themselves if they care. Many citations can either mean >> a top notch research effort that is well-respected or just a popular >> topic too (which has some value at times in relation to funding). >> Also, lots of minor papers or ones where the author is rarely first >> or second author are fine for folks who just completed a PhD and are >> hunting short term sabbatical or post-doc positions but not for >> tenure track positions in general. > Malcolm L. McCallum Assistant Professor of Biology Editor Herpetological Conservationa and Biology [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Number of times cited in a CV?
Bill asks: > To put it another way, if Lindemann had survived, could he get a job in > today's market? Rick Grosberg (UC Davis) asked a very similar question during his American Society of Naturalists presidential address in 2004 at the Evolution meetings. The title of his talk was: "Natural History for the 21st Century: Would Darwin Make the Short List?" The talk was recorded as an audio slideshow and is available in QCShow (Windows-only) format at: http://aics-research.com/lectures/evolution/grosberg-04ev/grosberg-04ev.qcshow You may have to download a player to view the lecture. The player is available from: http://aics-research.com/qcshow/playerhome.html Rick gave a funny and interesting talk. The first 20% of the talk (slides 1-15) is devoted to precisely the questions that have come up in this discussion, asking whether or not Darwin could have ever been hired by today's standards, while the last 33% (slides 64-88) is a natural history quiz that Rick put together, musically accompanied by David Hillis (UT Austin) and his lab band, PhyloZydeco. Dan Simberloff gave the introduction. Wirt Atmar
Re: Number of times cited in a CV?
As a former physicist I find this all quite bewildering. My thesis advisor got his Nobel prize for two papers, on just one of which he was first (and sole) author. The third author on the other paper also got a Nobel just for co-authoring that paper. Another chap I know got his Nobel prize for a single paper that he wrote while still a grad student which was published in a non-refereed journal. But that was back in the days when quality, creativity and importance of the research were the factors that mattered. Was that ever the case in ecology? To put it another way, if Lindemann had survived, could he get a job in today's market? Bill Silvert - Original Message - From: "Chris MacQuarrie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2007 6:08 PM Subject: Re: Number of times cited in a CV? > All, > > Nature published a news article related to this issue last week (with > apologies to those without access); Achievement index climbs the ranks > Nature 448, 737 (16 August 2007) | doi:10.1038/448737a . > > It discusses the rise of the Hirsch index or "h-index" as a measure of > research productivity and its ability to predict a young researcher's > future output. This index is, quoting the article, "...the number n > of a researcher's papers that have all received at least n citations". > > e.g.) if I have 5 first author papers each cited 5 times by other > authors, my H-index would be 5,..
Re: Number of times cited in a CV?
All, Nature published a news article related to this issue last week (with apologies to those without access); Achievement index climbs the ranks Nature 448, 737 (16 August 2007) | doi:10.1038/448737a . It discusses the rise of the Hirsch index or "h-index" as a measure of research productivity and its ability to predict a young researcher's future output. This index is, quoting the article, "...the number n of a researcher's papers that have all received at least n citations". e.g.) if I have 5 first author papers each cited 5 times by other authors, my H-index would be 5, The index's algorithm accounts for self citations and author order (here is a link to a software tool that calculates the index based on google scholar searches http://www.harzing.com/resources.htm#/pop.htm). I also believe Web of Science will now calculate this value as well using their database. Hirsch is quoted in the article as having seen applicants citing their personal H-index in CV's. This seems like a interesting way to measure a researcher's potential productivity as compared to a simple "# of citations" count. Especially since such a measure is susceptible to manipulation. The eithics or optics of providing any measure of productivity to a search committee is another matter. Cheers Chris MacQuarrie Phd Candidate University of Alberta On 8/23/07, Brian Todd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Greetings all, > Gary brings up an interesting topic that I would like to hear more > about from other colleagues: the concept of single large versus several > small (sounds like a Conservation Biology topic actually), or more > accurately: single large verus several small + single large. > > All else being equal, if an applicant has 10 manuscripts in regional > journals and 3 in top-tier journals, versus the same applicant with only > 3 manuscripts in top-tier journals, would one be preferred in lieu of > the other? I understand the "Selected Publications" trick where an > applicant can avoid listing the smaller publications, but I reject the > notion that an applicant must do that to remain competitive. It has been > suggested to me that publishing in smaller journals is sometimes viewed > negatively regardless of your other important publications. > > I hope it is not the case that publications in regional or > organism-specific journals are automatically assumed to be of lower > quality. It is more likely the case that the scope of the article and > the intended audience is simply narrower. I've always been perplexed at > how some people view publication in smaller journals to mean the science > or research is less rigorous, or the quality of writing poorer. It is > very likely true that most ecologists fit into a finer speciality > beneath the broad topic of ecology and, correspondingly, have research > and data on entomology, botany, ornithology, etc. that are equal in > rigor to their "bigger picture" manuscripts but perhaps less deserving > of publication before a broad audience. Should they be penalized for > taking the initiative to publish their data? I have alternatively heard > it argued that we have an obligation to treat all our data as important > and to publish them with consideration and diligence, provided the data > are accurate and the methods appropriate. > > In contrast, when I review a CV where a person has three major > publications, each separated by 2- or 3-year intervals where they > haven't published, I often wonder if they have trouble remaining focused > and productive or if they have had difficulty carrying their field > research to fruition. > > Thanks for any additional perspective, > Brian > > Brian D. Todd > The University of Georgia > Savannah River Ecology Laboratory > Drawer E > Aiken, SC 29802 > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.uga.edu/srelherp/staff/BTodd.htm > office: 803.725.0422 > fax: 803.725.3309 > > > >>> "Dr. Gary Grossman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 8/23/2007 9:25 AM >>> > I agree with everything that Susan Kephart said - it's the "meat and > potatoes" of a vita that get you the interview. The one exception > would be > if you're applying for jobs at small colleges where the open position > may be > the only ecologist in the dept. However, in those cases it probably > would > be best to put the relevant info in your application letter. Also > your > letters of reference should be commenting on the importance and > relevance of > your pubs. Finally, I'll bring up my pet peeve the "In Preparation" > section. Frankly, I don't think that I've served on a search committee > in > which jokes weren't made about the vita's that had 1-2 publications and > then > a list of 5+ mss. "in preparation". If you don't have it in ms. form > so > that you can send it to the search committee with your application, > then > don't put it on your vita. By contrast, your application letter would > be an > appropriate place to describe your publication strategy for your > dissertation work, but do it
Re: Number of times cited in a CV?
Greetings all, Gary brings up an interesting topic that I would like to hear more about from other colleagues: the concept of single large versus several small (sounds like a Conservation Biology topic actually), or more accurately: single large verus several small + single large. All else being equal, if an applicant has 10 manuscripts in regional journals and 3 in top-tier journals, versus the same applicant with only 3 manuscripts in top-tier journals, would one be preferred in lieu of the other? I understand the "Selected Publications" trick where an applicant can avoid listing the smaller publications, but I reject the notion that an applicant must do that to remain competitive. It has been suggested to me that publishing in smaller journals is sometimes viewed negatively regardless of your other important publications. I hope it is not the case that publications in regional or organism-specific journals are automatically assumed to be of lower quality. It is more likely the case that the scope of the article and the intended audience is simply narrower. I've always been perplexed at how some people view publication in smaller journals to mean the science or research is less rigorous, or the quality of writing poorer. It is very likely true that most ecologists fit into a finer speciality beneath the broad topic of ecology and, correspondingly, have research and data on entomology, botany, ornithology, etc. that are equal in rigor to their "bigger picture" manuscripts but perhaps less deserving of publication before a broad audience. Should they be penalized for taking the initiative to publish their data? I have alternatively heard it argued that we have an obligation to treat all our data as important and to publish them with consideration and diligence, provided the data are accurate and the methods appropriate. In contrast, when I review a CV where a person has three major publications, each separated by 2- or 3-year intervals where they haven't published, I often wonder if they have trouble remaining focused and productive or if they have had difficulty carrying their field research to fruition. Thanks for any additional perspective, Brian Brian D. Todd The University of Georgia Savannah River Ecology Laboratory Drawer E Aiken, SC 29802 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.uga.edu/srelherp/staff/BTodd.htm office: 803.725.0422 fax: 803.725.3309 >>> "Dr. Gary Grossman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 8/23/2007 9:25 AM >>> I agree with everything that Susan Kephart said - it's the "meat and potatoes" of a vita that get you the interview. The one exception would be if you're applying for jobs at small colleges where the open position may be the only ecologist in the dept. However, in those cases it probably would be best to put the relevant info in your application letter. Also your letters of reference should be commenting on the importance and relevance of your pubs. Finally, I'll bring up my pet peeve the "In Preparation" section. Frankly, I don't think that I've served on a search committee in which jokes weren't made about the vita's that had 1-2 publications and then a list of 5+ mss. "in preparation". If you don't have it in ms. form so that you can send it to the search committee with your application, then don't put it on your vita. By contrast, your application letter would be an appropriate place to describe your publication strategy for your dissertation work, but do it in a way that the committee can see that you're not bsing. For example, a throwaway line like "these studies should result in 4 major publications in international journals" is meaningless in comparison to several lines describing the content of each future paper and where you might send them. The truth is most anything that appears to be "padding" on a vita will elicit a negative response from some members of a search committee, although what constitutes padding will vary among members. Finally, I would make one minor comment on Susan's post regarding having lots of small papers. Although search committee's like to see a graduate student that publishes, if you have too many short papers then it may appear that you're more interested in numbers of publications rather than producing fewer high quality publications. This would certainly be a negative impression to leave the search committee with. IMO, most R1 institutions would favor a candidate with three papers in major journals like Ecology, Oecologia, Am. Nat. etc. over someone with 10 small papers all in regional journals. In conclusion, I would urge graduate students to work on their vita and application letter. Those are the first things the search committee's see and typically get you from the "pile" into the short list. Many searches don't ask for recommendations for applicants who don't make it on the short list, so you can't count on those to carry the day. You'd be surprised how many applications we see with poorly organized vitas, grammatical errors i
Re: Number of times cited in a CV?
Although we are currently forced to play this game, everyone should read this article that was first brought to my attention by Ken Dodd. If you want a pdf copy, email me. It is excellent reading for those in administrative posts. The article slams the issue of citation ratings providing a solid arguement as to why they degrade the scientific process rather than promote it. Lawrence, P.A. The mismeasurement of science. Current Biology 17(15):R584. On Thu, August 23, 2007 7:25 am, William Silvert wrote: > Alas, Susan is attacking one of the most prized strategies for achieving > fame in science -- publish papers with errors, which will draw critical > responses and generate tons of citations. > > Bill Silvert > > - Original Message - > From: "Susan Kephart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2007 8:01 AM > Subject: Re: Number of times cited in a CV? > > >> Dear Jonathan: >> >> Below is my quick response on "cited X time" in CV's. Others may >> view this practice differently of course, depending on the >> institution perhaps: >> >> I've been on search committees for many years, and have seen this >> practice increasingly in recent years in applications for tenure >> track positions in liberal arts institutions that emphasize both >> research and teaching. For our searches at least, I consider it an >> unnecessary use of the applicant's time and don't recall that topic >> ever coming up as a positive in a committee meeting. At the pre- >> interview stage, my colleagues and I tend to be much more interested >> in the caliber of the paper, the rigor of peer review for the journal >> it is published in, comments on that person's research from faculty >> mentors/recommenders whose own work is highly regarded, and most >> importantly , the ability of the author to write cogently about the >> significance of his or her research, as well as how that research >> might be continued and developed in the future. A few strong papers >> in excellent journals on a CV, and a pdf of an exemplar paper can go >> a long way towards shifting someone's application up a notch than how >> many times a paper is cited IMHO . . Folks on the search committee >> should be discriminating enough to recognize stellar contributions to >> the literature without being alerted to citation frequency, or look >> it up for themselves if they care. Many citations can either mean >> a top notch research effort that is well-respected or just a popular >> topic too (which has some value at times in relation to funding). >> Also, lots of minor papers or ones where the author is rarely first >> or second author are fine for folks who just completed a PhD and are >> hunting short term sabbatical or post-doc positions but not for >> tenure track positions in general. > Malcolm L. McCallum Assistant Professor of Biology Editor Herpetological Conservationa and Biology [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Number of times cited in a CV?
I agree with everything that Susan Kephart said - it's the "meat and potatoes" of a vita that get you the interview. The one exception would be if you're applying for jobs at small colleges where the open position may be the only ecologist in the dept. However, in those cases it probably would be best to put the relevant info in your application letter. Also your letters of reference should be commenting on the importance and relevance of your pubs. Finally, I'll bring up my pet peeve the "In Preparation" section. Frankly, I don't think that I've served on a search committee in which jokes weren't made about the vita's that had 1-2 publications and then a list of 5+ mss. "in preparation". If you don't have it in ms. form so that you can send it to the search committee with your application, then don't put it on your vita. By contrast, your application letter would be an appropriate place to describe your publication strategy for your dissertation work, but do it in a way that the committee can see that you're not bsing. For example, a throwaway line like "these studies should result in 4 major publications in international journals" is meaningless in comparison to several lines describing the content of each future paper and where you might send them. The truth is most anything that appears to be "padding" on a vita will elicit a negative response from some members of a search committee, although what constitutes padding will vary among members. Finally, I would make one minor comment on Susan's post regarding having lots of small papers. Although search committee's like to see a graduate student that publishes, if you have too many short papers then it may appear that you're more interested in numbers of publications rather than producing fewer high quality publications. This would certainly be a negative impression to leave the search committee with. IMO, most R1 institutions would favor a candidate with three papers in major journals like Ecology, Oecologia, Am. Nat. etc. over someone with 10 small papers all in regional journals. In conclusion, I would urge graduate students to work on their vita and application letter. Those are the first things the search committee's see and typically get you from the "pile" into the short list. Many searches don't ask for recommendations for applicants who don't make it on the short list, so you can't count on those to carry the day. You'd be surprised how many applications we see with poorly organized vitas, grammatical errors in application letters, etc. which result in low rankings when evaluated. cheers, g2 Gary D. Grossman Distinguished Research Professor - Animal Ecology Warnell School of Forestry & Natural Resources University of Georgia Athens, GA, USA 30602 http://www.arches.uga.edu/~grossman Board of Editors - Animal Biodiversity and Conservation Editorial Board - Freshwater Biology Editorial Board - Ecology Freshwater Fish
Re: Number of times cited in a CV?
Alas, Susan is attacking one of the most prized strategies for achieving fame in science -- publish papers with errors, which will draw critical responses and generate tons of citations. Bill Silvert - Original Message - From: "Susan Kephart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2007 8:01 AM Subject: Re: Number of times cited in a CV? > Dear Jonathan: > > Below is my quick response on "cited X time" in CV's. Others may > view this practice differently of course, depending on the > institution perhaps: > > I've been on search committees for many years, and have seen this > practice increasingly in recent years in applications for tenure > track positions in liberal arts institutions that emphasize both > research and teaching. For our searches at least, I consider it an > unnecessary use of the applicant's time and don't recall that topic > ever coming up as a positive in a committee meeting. At the pre- > interview stage, my colleagues and I tend to be much more interested > in the caliber of the paper, the rigor of peer review for the journal > it is published in, comments on that person's research from faculty > mentors/recommenders whose own work is highly regarded, and most > importantly , the ability of the author to write cogently about the > significance of his or her research, as well as how that research > might be continued and developed in the future. A few strong papers > in excellent journals on a CV, and a pdf of an exemplar paper can go > a long way towards shifting someone's application up a notch than how > many times a paper is cited IMHO . . Folks on the search committee > should be discriminating enough to recognize stellar contributions to > the literature without being alerted to citation frequency, or look > it up for themselves if they care. Many citations can either mean > a top notch research effort that is well-respected or just a popular > topic too (which has some value at times in relation to funding). > Also, lots of minor papers or ones where the author is rarely first > or second author are fine for folks who just completed a PhD and are > hunting short term sabbatical or post-doc positions but not for > tenure track positions in general.
Re: Number of times cited in a CV?
Dear Jonathan: Below is my quick response on "cited X time" in CV's. Others may view this practice differently of course, depending on the institution perhaps: I've been on search committees for many years, and have seen this practice increasingly in recent years in applications for tenure track positions in liberal arts institutions that emphasize both research and teaching. For our searches at least, I consider it an unnecessary use of the applicant's time and don't recall that topic ever coming up as a positive in a committee meeting. At the pre- interview stage, my colleagues and I tend to be much more interested in the caliber of the paper, the rigor of peer review for the journal it is published in, comments on that person's research from faculty mentors/recommenders whose own work is highly regarded, and most importantly , the ability of the author to write cogently about the significance of his or her research, as well as how that research might be continued and developed in the future. A few strong papers in excellent journals on a CV, and a pdf of an exemplar paper can go a long way towards shifting someone's application up a notch than how many times a paper is cited IMHO . . Folks on the search committee should be discriminating enough to recognize stellar contributions to the literature without being alerted to citation frequency, or look it up for themselves if they care. Many citations can either mean a top notch research effort that is well-respected or just a popular topic too (which has some value at times in relation to funding). Also, lots of minor papers or ones where the author is rarely first or second author are fine for folks who just completed a PhD and are hunting short term sabbatical or post-doc positions but not for tenure track positions in general. Hope this helps and good luck with your future research endeavors Susan On Aug 22, 2007, at 1:44 PM, Jonathan Greenberg wrote: > I was chatting with a colleague of mine who was having a bit of > trouble > getting jobs because rather than having a lot of minor > publications, he has > a few HEAVILY cited papers -- I was wondering if any of you either > put a > "Cited X times" next to each article in your CV's publication > section, or > have seen people doing this? Would those of you who are reading > CVs for > potential applicants be interested in seeing these sort of statistics > (derived from google scholar or science citation)? Thanks! > > --j > > -- > Jonathan A. Greenberg, PhD > Postdoctoral Scholar > Center for Spatial Technologies and Remote Sensing (CSTARS) > University of California, Davis > One Shields Avenue > The Barn, Room 250N > Davis, CA 95616 > Cell: 415-794-5043 > AIM: jgrn307 > MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Number of times cited in a CV?
I was chatting with a colleague of mine who was having a bit of trouble getting jobs because rather than having a lot of minor publications, he has a few HEAVILY cited papers -- I was wondering if any of you either put a "Cited X times" next to each article in your CV's publication section, or have seen people doing this? Would those of you who are reading CVs for potential applicants be interested in seeing these sort of statistics (derived from google scholar or science citation)? Thanks! --j -- Jonathan A. Greenberg, PhD Postdoctoral Scholar Center for Spatial Technologies and Remote Sensing (CSTARS) University of California, Davis One Shields Avenue The Barn, Room 250N Davis, CA 95616 Cell: 415-794-5043 AIM: jgrn307 MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
