Related papers: Large Teams Overshadow Individual Recognition
The rapid adoption of generative AI tools is reshaping how scholars produce and communicate knowledge, raising questions about who benefits and who is left behind. We analyze over 230,000 Scopus-indexed computer science articles between…
Purpose: This study compares the hierarchical structure of scientific teams across countries and investigates factors associated with the observed cross-national differences. Design/methodology/approach: Drawing on 150,817 publications with…
Scientific prizes are among the greatest recognition a scientist receives from their peers and arguably shape the direction of a field by conferring credibility to persons, ideas, and disciplines, providing financial rewards, and promoting…
Peer review in academic research aims not only to ensure factual correctness but also to identify work of high scientific potential that can shape future research directions. This task is especially critical in fast-moving fields such as…
References, the mechanism scientists rely on to signal previous knowledge, lately have turned into widely used and misused measures of scientific impact. Yet, when a discovery becomes common knowledge, citations suffer from obliteration by…
How much do individuals contribute to team output? I propose an econometric framework to quantify individual contributions when only the output of their teams is observed. The identification strategy relies on following individuals who work…
Nowadays, scientific challenges usually require approaches that cross traditional boundaries between academic disciplines, driving many researchers towards interdisciplinarity. Despite its obvious importance, there is a lack of studies on…
Meritocratic systems, from admissions to hiring, aim to impartially reward skill and effort. Yet persistent disparities across race, gender, and class challenge this ideal. Some attribute these gaps to structural inequality; others to…
This paper addresses how to assign a monetary value to scientific publications, particularly in the case of multi-author papers arising from large-scale research collaborations. Contemporary science increasingly relies on extensive and…
AI systems powered by large language models can act as capable assistants for writing and editing. In these tasks, the AI system acts as a co-creative partner, making novel contributions to an artifact-under-creation alongside its human…
Citations are essential for recognizing scientific contributions, yet citation behavior is shaped by more than just relevance or quality. We analyzed approximately 255,000 refereed astronomy articles published between 2000 and 2025 to…
A project (e.g., writing a collaborative research paper) is often a group effort. At the end, each contributor identifies their contribution, often verbally. The reward, however, is very frequently financial. It leads to the question of…
Accurate measurement of research productivity should take account of both the number of co-authors of every scientific work and of the different contributions of the individuals. For researchers in the life sciences, common practice is to…
Despite extensive research on scientific disruption, two questions remain: why disruption has declined amid growing knowledge, and why disruptive work receives fewer and delayed citations. One way to address these questions is to identify…
Academic citation and social attention measure different dimensions of the impact of research results. Both measures do not correlate with each other, and they are influenced by many factors. Among these factors are the field of research,…
The historical and contemporary under-attribution of women's contributions to scientific scholarship is well-known and well-studied, with effects that are felt today in myriad ways by women scientists. One measure of this under-attribution…
The Matthew effect refers to the adage written some two-thousand years ago in the Gospel of St. Matthew: "For to all those who have, more will be given." Even two millennia later, this idiom is used by sociologists to qualitatively describe…
In a recent paper, Hirsch (2018) proposes to attribute the credit for a co-authored paper to the {\alpha}-author--the author with the highest h-index--regardless of his or her actual contribution, effectively reducing the role of the other…
Scientific research increasingly depends on multi-author collaboration, yet the systems used to allocate authorship credit remain vulnerable to conflict, strategic behavior, and project breakdown. Although prior work has shown that authors…
Research performance is often measured using bibliometric indicators, such as publication count, total citations, and $h$-index. These metrics influence career advancements, salary adjustments, administrative opportunities, funding…