Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

The Scientific Method01:32

The Scientific Method

273.3K
The scientific method is a detailed, empirical problem-solving process used by biologists and other scientists. This iterative approach involves formulating a question based on observation, developing a testable potential explanation for the observation (called a hypothesis), making and testing predictions based on the hypothesis, and using the findings to create new hypotheses and predictions.
Generally, predictions are tested using carefully-designed experiments. Based on the outcome of these...
273.3K
The Scientific Method02:40

The Scientific Method

66.3K
Research is what makes the difference between facts and opinions. Facts are observable realities, and opinions are personal judgments, conclusions, or attitudes that may or may not be accurate. In the scientific community, facts can be established only using evidence collected through empirical research.
66.3K
Production Efficiency01:01

Production Efficiency

18.9K
Net production efficiency (NPE) is the efficiency at which organisms assimilate energy into biomass for the next trophic level. Due to low metabolic rates and less energy spent on thermoregulatory processes, the NPE of ectotherms (cold-blooded animals) is 10 times higher than endotherms (warm-blooded animals).
18.9K
Limits to Natural Selection01:38

Limits to Natural Selection

35.6K
Organisms that are well-adapted to their environment are more likely to survive and reproduce. However, natural selection does not lead to perfectly adapted organisms. Several factors constrain natural selection.
35.6K
Speciation Rates01:07

Speciation Rates

23.1K
Overview
23.1K
Frequency-dependent Selection01:21

Frequency-dependent Selection

24.3K
When the fitness of a trait is influenced by how common it is (i.e., its frequency) relative to different traits within a population, this is referred to as frequency-dependent selection. Frequency-dependent selection may occur between species or within a single species. This type of selection can either be positive—with more common phenotypes having higher fitness—or negative, with rarer phenotypes conferring increased fitness.
24.3K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Subinhibitory concentrations of antibiotics mediate primary metabolism and shape diverse species interactions among coevolved soil Streptomyces.

The ISME journal·2026
Same author

Analysis of the impact of gene evolution on reproductive effects reveals prevalent sexual and germline-soma conflicts.

Nature ecology & evolution·2026
Same author

Global stability of ecological and evolutionary dynamics via equivalence.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America·2026
Same author

Robust coexistence in competitive ecological communities.

Nature communications·2026
Same author

Landscape-scale analysis of raccoon rabies surveillance reveals different drivers of disease dynamics across latitude.

PLoS neglected tropical diseases·2025
Same author

Effects of Phylogeny on Coexistence in Model Communities.

The American naturalist·2025

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Mar 1, 2026

Comparing Bibliometric Analysis Using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Databases
05:02

Comparing Bibliometric Analysis Using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Databases

Published on: October 24, 2019

34.0K

And, not or: Quality, quantity in scientific publishing.

Matthew J Michalska-Smith1, Stefano Allesina1,2,3

  • 1Department of Ecology & Evolution, University of Chicago, Chicago IL, United States of America 60637.

Plos One
|June 2, 2017
PubMed
Summary

Scientific productivity may not trade-off with paper quality. More publications correlate with higher citation counts, suggesting quantity may enhance, not diminish, research impact. This challenges traditional views on scientific publishing.

More Related Videos

Global and Current Research Trends of Single-Cell Sequencing in Cancer: A Bibliometric and Visualization Study
07:50

Global and Current Research Trends of Single-Cell Sequencing in Cancer: A Bibliometric and Visualization Study

Published on: April 18, 2025

1.1K
Author Spotlight: Biological Standardization to Ensure Reproducibility and Harmonization in Research
04:50

Author Spotlight: Biological Standardization to Ensure Reproducibility and Harmonization in Research

Published on: August 4, 2023

1.7K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Mar 1, 2026

Comparing Bibliometric Analysis Using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Databases
05:02

Comparing Bibliometric Analysis Using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Databases

Published on: October 24, 2019

34.0K
Global and Current Research Trends of Single-Cell Sequencing in Cancer: A Bibliometric and Visualization Study
07:50

Global and Current Research Trends of Single-Cell Sequencing in Cancer: A Bibliometric and Visualization Study

Published on: April 18, 2025

1.1K
Author Spotlight: Biological Standardization to Ensure Reproducibility and Harmonization in Research
04:50

Author Spotlight: Biological Standardization to Ensure Reproducibility and Harmonization in Research

Published on: August 4, 2023

1.7K

Area of Science:

  • Bibliometrics
  • Scientometrics
  • Sociology of Science

Background:

  • A common perception in scientific publishing is a trade-off between the quantity and quality of research output.
  • Previous studies suggest a positive correlation between productivity (number of publications) and paper quality (measured by citations).

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the relationship between scientific productivity and publication quality using a novel approach.
  • To analyze a large dataset of publications from members of the National Academy of Sciences.

Main Methods:

  • Comparative analysis of individual researchers' publication records across different years.
  • Examination of citation counts for both the most and least cited papers in relation to annual productivity.
  • Analysis of simulated publication records by randomizing citation counts to control for underlying distributions.

Main Results:

  • Researchers' most highly cited papers received more citations in more productive years.
  • Conversely, the least cited papers received fewer citations in more productive years.
  • Simulated data with randomized citation counts replicated these observed trends, indicating a stochastic element.

Conclusions:

  • The observed positive relationship between publication quantity and quality may be an artifact of random chance in citation accumulation.
  • Higher productivity offers more opportunities to achieve high citation counts, rather than directly improving quality.
  • Citation counts might be more random and less indicative of inherent quality than previously assumed.