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. 
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @o_guest
They should know that hiring committees get very irritated by that kind of jape....
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @lorraine_hope @o_guest
Conversely, if you're a hiring committee that makes decisions by counting publications, or IF-weighted publications, we're also irritated by your japes.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @TraversEoin @lorraine_hope
I've never been on that kind of hiring committee you mean (i.e. for a permanent position) but I wonder how much is conscious/unconscious on an individual level and how much is literally in the "rules"/explicitly written down? I have been on other hiring committees and FWIW no IF
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
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.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @TraversEoin
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.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @lorraine_hope @o_guest
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? [...]
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
[...] 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)
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @TraversEoin @o_guest
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.
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes
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.