Maybe it’s the approach of the first winter snows or maybe it’s just the most recent PhD cartoon (probably a combination of factors). But I began to think about my scientific impact.
Jorge Cham PhD Comics
It’s been a year since I defended my thesis so I guess a little thought on the topic may not be entirely out of place. Since 1999 I have written over 40 academic texts (journal and conference articles, book chapters, reports and more). Besides my PhD I have also acted as editor to a book, taught an endless amount of classes and given countless guest lectures.
Despite all this “scientific” or “academic” production my impact on the scientific community is negligible. Ok so I realize that my field is not high profile. But I have the sneaking suspicion that the impact of my work is not what it should be or could be.
If we choose to set aside arguments that my impact is low because I am unreadable – since they provide no help – then there may be another reason.
The focus of scientific/academic work has become the journal article. We are not measured in research but in publication. The problem with this system is that it creates a desire (intentional or unintentional) to manipulate the system. What we have seen over the last thirty years is the explosion of the number of journals and the publication hungry academic is always in the market for yet another place to deliver an article to.
The purpose of the journal was to provide an avenue where scientific work could be published quickly and in a focused manner. Well while some journals have longer time-to-print than books this is no longer an advantage. And the dance between authors, editors and reviewers has become so stylized that it resembles a kabuki theater (complex, ornate & beautiful but incomprehensible).
So where am I going with this? Not very far. The process of academic work entails journal publication – we are locked into this system. But to achieve true recognition and impact, in my field, I think your either need to be a cartoonist – or to write books.