Citation Metrics Continue to Make News and for the Wrong Reasons. (January 24, 2008)

Mounir Errami of the Division of Translational Research Department, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, and Harold Garner at the McDermott Center for Human Growth and Development, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in a "Commentary" in today's Nature ask rhetorically: Are scientists publishing more duplicate papers? And then reply: An automated search of seven million biomedical abstracts suggests that they are.

And the Higher Education section in today's Australian have given Errami's and Garner's analysis broadsheet coverage.

The points that the authors emphasise are: "The duplication of scientific articles has been largely ignored by the gatekeepers of scientific information... Automated text-matching systems are used by high schools and universities. We hold our children up to a higher standard than we do our scientists... The fear of having some transgression exposed in a public and embarrassing manner could be a very effective deterrent."

Below we include the two graphics given in the Nature paper and let them show just one reason citation based metrics should be critically evaluated.

If Senator Carr in determined to allocate tight research funds on a questionable (and certainly unproven) approach, let him put his case in such a way to allow it to be publicly scrutinised and debated.