StudiesMotivations for Publishing and Presenting in the Life Science and Medical Professions  Download results! PC Users: To save this file to your computer, right click on the title and "Save Target As..." (Internet Explorer) / "Save Link As..." (Netscape). Then specify where you would like to save the file.Mac Users: Hold control and click on the title then select "Download Link to Disk" (Internet Explorer) / "Save this Link As..." (Netscape). Then specify where you would like to save the file. The Science Advisory Board is proud to release its report, “Motivations for Publishing and Presenting in the Life Science and Medical Professions,” which is based upon over 2,000 member responses to a nine-question study on publication and presentation objectives. Specifically, the report highlights the reasons Science Advisory Board members publish or present the results of their work and whether these reasons vary depending on job position, segment, geographic location, gender or years of experience. The data indicate that almost half of the first author papers published each year are from Science Advisory Board members who have been at their current job position less than five years. This finding is supported by additional figures demonstrating an inverse relationship between communicating knowledge and demonstrating productivity by number of years in current job position, i.e., the desire to communicate knowledge increases as the need to demonstrate productivity decreases over time. According to the results of the study, Science Advisory Board members overwhelming publish research findings in journals or present research findings at conferences in order to communicate knowledge. The second most common reason for publishing or presenting research findings for principal investigators, lab directors, staff scientists, postdoctoral fellows and graduate students is to demonstrate productivity. In contrast, the second most common reason technical staff publishes or presents research findings is to attain a higher salary or promotion. In the clinical fields, the second most common reason nurses/nurse mangers and physicians publish or present research findings is to establish prestige in their fields. “As in all professions,” states Dr. Tamara Zemlo, Director of Scientific & Medical Communications at The Science Advisory Board, “evaluation of an individual’s productivity is often used as a criterion for deciding on a job promotion or salary raise. However, demonstrating productivity also engenders respect and establishes one’s reputation. These two ambitions are important in establishing or supporting one’s career.” In addition to graphically representing the study’s key findings, the report features the implications of this data in the context of influencing the development of scientific and medical career paths. The report also serves as a discussion guide because it raises questions for further dialogue on career motivations as well as the broader implications of publishing and presenting scientific and medical research. [ View Current & Future Studies ] [ View Past Studies ] |
|
