Details
Please click on the link below and complete this one-question survey:
https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/G9Z65R6
We'd like to know what you think in order to adjust the LSN publication score formula. You can also post comments below.
Stats
- Recommendations +1 100% positive of 1 vote(s)
- Views 2749
- Comments 3
Recommended
-
Alen Piljić
Managing director | Life Science Network gGmbH
Also:
- President | Research Elements Association
Post a comment
Comments
-
Alen Piljić Thursday, 08 May 2014 - 21:45 UTC
About 30 responses. Result: 13.75 publications.
-
Alen Piljić Wednesday, 05 March 2014 - 11:43 UTC
I would have defined it better, but I didn't know how. I think it is not possible to define an excellent and an average publication using current metrics. This is why I left it to the voters to intuitively put 'excellent' and 'average' in a relation to each other. All we need at this stage is to see roughly what the opinions are, and if the formula we are using at the moment is coming close to those opinions.
Once people start rating and looking at the scores, it may be that we need another survey to adjust the formula. Or maybe we need to calculate the score in a completely different way... -
Vibor Laketa Wednesday, 05 March 2014 - 08:28 UTC
I think in the survey it needs to be defined what an "average" or "excellent" publication mean. I defined "excellent" as the ones with the high impact in their field and "average" as the ones with the low impact in the field but both being of very high quality (high quality means that conclusions are backed up with experiments and proper controls are used)