Scientific productivity: An exploratory study of metrics and incentives

Area of Science:

• Medical research
• Bibliometrics
• Scientific publishing

Background:

• The scientific literature faces a reproducibility crisis, partly due to competitive pressure for high bibliometric measures.
• Current incentives favor discovery counts and journal impact factors, discouraging rigorous confirmatory research.

Purpose of the Study:

• To explore alternative metrics and incentives that can improve scientific literature integrity.
• To assess the impact of current bibliometric incentives on the adoption of high-quality research methods.

Main Methods:

• Analysis of a sample of rigorous Phase II-IV clinical trials, including unpublished studies.
• Exploratory examination of bibliometric measures and their influence on research practices.

Main Results:

• Rigorous methods can reduce false positives but may be disincentivized by current reward systems.
• Existing bibliometric incentives may lead researchers to shift towards less informative, already-popular research areas.
• The study suggests the possibility of developing more appropriate reward systems.

Conclusions:

• A shift in evaluation metrics is needed to foster scientific integrity and progress.
• Incentivizing quality of methods, reproducibility, innovation, and information diversity can counter negative effects of current bibliometrics.
• Developing a new system of rewards is essential for maintaining the integrity of scientific literature.