The Art of Scientific Performance

[en] Humanity builds upon scientific findings, but the credibility of science might be at risk in a 'postfactual' era of advanced information technologies. Here we propose a systemic change for science, to turn away from a growth paradigm and to refocus on quality, characterized by curiosity, surprise, discovery, and societal relevance.

Research center :

Luxembourg Centre for Socio-Environmental Systems (LCSES)

Disciplines :

Library & information sciences
Life sciences: Multidisciplinary, general & others

Author, co-author :

SEPPELT, Ralf ; University of Luxembourg > Luxembourg Centre for Socio-Environmental Systems (LCSES)

Beckmann, Michael

Václavík, Tomáš

Volk, Martin

External co-authors :

yes

Language :

English

Title :

The Art of Scientific Performance

Publication date :

2018

Journal title :

Trends in Ecology and Evolution

ISSN :

0169-5347

eISSN :

1872-8383

Publisher :

Elsevier, Nl

Volume :

Issue :

Pages :

805 - 809

Peer reviewed :

Peer Reviewed verified by ORBi

Focus Area :

Sustainable Development

Additional URL :

https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0169534718301848

Available on ORBilu :

since 14 May 2025

Statistics

Number of views

73 (9 by Unilu)

Number of downloads

0 (0 by Unilu)

More statistics

Scopus citations^®

Scopus citations^®
without self-citations

OpenCitations

OpenAlex citations

Bibliography

Nosek, B.A., et al. Promoting an open research culture. Science 348 (2015), 1422–1425.
Abbott, A., et al. Metrics: do metrics matter?. Nature 465 (2010), 860–862.
Biagioli, M., Watch out for cheats in citation game. Nature, 535, 2016 201–201.
Sinatra, R., et al. Quantifying the evolution of individual scientific impact. Science, 354, 2016 aaf5239.
Davis, P.M., Eigenfactor: does the principle of repeated improvement result in better estimates than raw citation counts?. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 59 (2008), 2186–2188.
Smaldino, P.E., McElreath, R., The natural selection of bad science. R. Soc. Open Sci., 3, 2016 160384.
Open Science Collaboration, Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349, 2015 aac4716.
Larivière, V., et al. Global gender disparities in science. Nature 504 (2013), 211–213.
Larivière, V., et al. The oligopoly of academic publishers in the digital era. PLoS One 10 (2015), 1–15.
Ware, M., Mabe, M., The STM Report., 2015, International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers.
Jinha, A.E., Article 50 million: an estimate of the number of scholarly articles in existence. Learn. Publ. 23 (2010), 258–263.
Herndon, T., et al. Does high public debt consistently stifle economic growth? A critique of Reinhart and Rogoff. Cambridge J. Econ. 38 (2014), 257–279.
Lindsay, J., Boyle, P., The conceptual penis as a social construct. Cogent Soc. Sci. 3 (2017), 1–7.
Savenije, H., Announcement by EGU and Copernicus. Cryosphere, 11, 2017, 5194.
Beall, J., Predatory publishers are corrupting open access. Nature, 489, 2012, 179.