Abstract
To date, it remains unclear how different approaches to early career publishing behaviors (e.g., publishing papers in the same journal or in different journals) may benefit a young scholar’s career success. In this paper, we develop a quantitative understanding of this question, analyzing 2982 qualified authorships who have academic ages ≥ 5 years and publications ≥ 3 during the first five years of their careers from 37,542 publications in three fields of science. We defined author categories by three particular publishing behaviors, and determined how authors performed in their subsequent academic careers by using six bibliometric proxies. From the results of Welch’s ANOVA and Games–Howell multiple comparisons test, we found that the best publishing choice included publishing some of the author’s papers in the same journal. This early career publishing choice may produce a dramatic increase in career success as seen in higher numbers of publications and collaborators, and a higher h-index, with different magnitudes for different scientific fields and authorships. Our findings illustrate the role that early career publishing behavior plays in relation to future career success and indicate that in order to maximize career outcomes, an advantageous publishing strategy for early career scholars is to publish some of their papers in the same journal.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C., & Costa, F. (2019). Diversification versus specialization in scientific research: Which strategy pays off? Technovation,82–83, 51–57.
Acuna, D. E., Allesina, S., & Kording, K. P. (2012). Future impact: Predicting scientific success. Nature,489, 201–202.
Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics,11, 959–975.
Bornmann, L., & Leydesdorff, L. (2014). Scientometrics in a changing research landscape. EMBO Reports,15, 1228–1232.
Cameron, E. Z., Gray, M. E., & White, A. M. (2013). Is publication rate an equal opportunity metric? Trends in Ecology & Evolution,28, 7–8.
Carpenter, C. R., Cone, D. C., & Sarli, C. C. (2014). Using publication metrics to highlight academic productivity and research impact. Academic Emergency Medicine,21, 1160–1172.
Costas, R., van Leeuwen, T. N., & Bordons, M. (2010). Self-citations at the meso and individual levels: Effects of different calculation methods. Scientometrics,82, 517–537.
De Battisti, F., & Salini, S. (2013). Robust analysis of bibliometric data. Statistical Methods and Applications,22, 269–283.
de Winter, J. (2013). Using the Student’s t test with extremely small sample sizes. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 18. http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=18&n=10.
Fortunato, S., Bergstrom, C. T., Börner, K., Evans, J. A., Helbing, D., Milojević, S., et al. (2018). Science of science. Science,359, eaao0185. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aao0185.
Fox, M. (2005). Gender, family characteristics, and publication productivity among scientists. Social Studies of Science,35, 131–150.
Hirsch, J. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America,102, 16569–16572.
Kolesnikov, S., Fukumoto, E., & Bozeman, B. (2018). Researchers’ risk-smoothing publication strategies: Is productivity the enemy of impact? Scientometrics,116, 1995–2017.
Larivière, V., & Costas, R. (2016). How many is too many? On the relationship between research productivity and impact. PLoS ONE,11, e0162709. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0162709.
Larivière, V., Ni, C. Q., Gingras, Y., Cronin, B., & Sugimoto, C. R. (2013). Bibliometrics: Global gender disparities in science. Nature,504, 211–213.
Lee, S., & Bozeman, B. (2005). The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity. Social Studies of Science,35, 673–702.
Li, W., Aste, T., Caccioli, F., & Livan, G. (2019). Reciprocity and impact in academic careers. EPJ Data Science,8, 20. https://doi.org/10.1140/epjds/s13688-019-0199-3.
McCabe, M. J., & Snyder, C. M. (2014). Identifying the effect of open access on citations using a panel of science journals. Economic Inquiry,52, 1284–1300.
McDonald, J. H. (2014). Handbook of biological statistics (3rd ed.). Baltimore, MD: Sparky House Publishing.
Milojevic, S., Radicchi, F., & Walsh, J. (2018). Changing demographics of scientific careers: The rise of the temporary workforce. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America,115, 12616–12623.
Ortlieb, R., & Weiss, S. (2018). What makes academic careers less insecure? The role of individual-level antecedents. Higher Education,76, 571–587.
Petersen, A. M. (2015). Quantifying the impact of weak, strong, and super ties in scientific careers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America,112, E4671–E4680.
Sekara, V., Deville, P., Ahnert, S. E., Barabasi, A.-L., Sinatra, R., & Lehmann, S. (2018). The chaperone effect in scientific publishing. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America,115, 12603–12607.
Sugimoto, C. R., Sugimoto, T. J., Tsou, A., Milojević, S., & Larivière, V. (2016). Age stratification and cohort effects in scholarly communication: A study of social sciences. Scientometrics,109, 997–1016.
Tahamtan, I., Afshar, A. S., & Ahamdzadeh, K. (2016). Factors affecting number of citations: A comprehensive review of the literature. Scientometrics,107, 1195–1225.
van Dijk, D., Manor, O., & Carey, L. B. (2014). Publication metrics and success on the academic job market. Current Biology,24, R516–R517.
Waltman, L. (2012). An empirical analysis of the use of alphabetical authorship in scientific publishing. Journal of Informetrics,6, 700–711.
Wuchty, S., Jones, B. F., & Uzzi, B. (2007). The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science,316, 1036–1039.
Yeo, I., & Johnson, R. (2000). A new family of power transformations to improve normality or symmetry. Biometrika,87, 954–959.
Acknowledgements
This work uses Scopus data provided by Elsevier B.V. The authors appreciate the anonymous referees and the handling editor for their valuable suggestions that have helped improve this paper substantially. The authors are indebted to David Nielsen at AEREA Inc. (http://aereainc.com/), Shouhua Xu at the Institute of Soil and Water Conservation, Northwest A&F University, and Juan Li at Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, for making suggestions. This study was funded by the International Partnership Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (161461KYSB20170013) and the Chinese Academy of Sciences “Light of West China” Program. Data and codes used in the study are available upon reasonable request.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zhang, Y., Yu, Q. What is the best article publishing strategy for early career scientists?. Scientometrics 122, 397–408 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03297-4
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03297-4