I've had many similar conversations with youngling Ph.D. students about the fact that certain people give them impostor syndrome (specifically on number of publications) and on Googling the person they've padded their "Journal Articles" CV section with conference proceedings. 
or even journal names were mentioned. But of course postdoc and RSE jobs aren't the same as permanent positions and my experience is tiny either way.
-
-
And "not mentioned" doesn't mean they didn't play some subconscious or latent role of course... Sadly, I've no real ideas (other than like you just did, mentioning it) how to address either since changing institutional policy and personal biases/preferences is really hard.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
When we hire, we plot applicant publications in a large spreadsheet alongside metrics etc (& a bunch of other information from CVs/applications) so the information for everyone is fully transparent. Conf proceedings would not be included. Don't think this is common practice tho.
-
Looking back, my comment looks more sarky than I meant it to be. Sorry! I know publication counting is inevitable, even if it does lead to perverse incentives. Shouldn't we celebrate and promote our conference proceedings and preprints though? [...]
-
[...] I mean, work in eLife or JEP:G will be taken more seriously than that in proceedings, but proceedings have more quality control than preprints, and no one is arguing we shouldn't promote our preprints. (I'm leaving aside the lack of rigour at the 'glamour' journals)
-
To be clear - my view is that publication counting is utterly stupid. Also in some research areas/locations there has been a culture of 'never mind the quality, feel the width' (i.e. lots of poor quality pubs) - this is important to take into account too.
- End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.