We're publishing (and perishing) as fast as we can

Fiddle with an old recipe and you may get an unpalatable, but not always unpredictable result.

It was entirely predictable, according to Australian National University researcher Dr Linda Butler, that a crucial change to the funding formula for academic research, giving researchers new incentive to publish more papers, would lead to a decline in publication quality.

In a letter in the October 31 issue of the international research journal Nature, Butler, of the Research Evaluation and Policy project at the School of Social Sciences in Canberra, notes that concerns were expressed at the time the Federal government changed the funding formula in 1995.

Butler's review of the Research Citation Index Research shows that the change has led rapidly and predictably, to a publish-or-perish mentality in academia.

She notes that since 1995, a researcher's publication record was added as a new element to a funding formula that had previously been based on past research income, and number of postgraduate students.

Researchers were quick to calculate the value of a publication, says Butler -- between 1995 and 2000, the 'value' of each new paper ranged between $761 and $1061.

Butler compared the number of publications from Australian academic research appearing in the SCI on a quartile basis with the top quartile representing the more prestigious, high-impact journals, and the fourth quartile the least prestigious journals.

The number of papers in the fourth-quartile journals doubled between 1995 and 2000, while third-quartile publications rose by 50 per cent. Meanwhile, the publication rate rose for the top two quartiles by only 20 per cent for the same period. Butler described this lack of uniformity as the most striking aspect of her study.

The rate of change increased after the government's 1999 review of higher education research, which saw more than half the Commonwealth funding for higher education research targeted through the Education, Science and Training portfolio under the changed funding formula.

The net effect is that any published research paper is now 'worth' around $3000 to a university.

The formula's failure to take into account the quality of the journal in which a paper is published has provided little incentive for researchers to strive for publications in the more prestigious journals.

"Whether a publication is a ground-breaking piece in Nature, or a pedestrian piece in a low-impact journal, the rewards are identical," Butler wrote.

The value of a research publication has trebled over the period, and there is no sign that the pressure to publish quantity, not quality, will increase, she says.

Not all universities are anxious to see the formula amended to reward research published in quality journals -- smaller universities have done best under the existing system.

Butler says these concerns are now resurfacing with the latest review of the higher education system -- but she cautions that without careful consideration, any changes to the formula, particularly the removal of the publication component, could prove just as problematic as the one they seek to replace.