Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study explores the criteria by which biologists in the United States evaluate their peers' scientific performance. Six distinguished biology professors rated forty-two former National Science Foundation Postdoctoral Fellows on the basis of the latter's CVs and bibliographies. The most powerful predictor of these quality judgements was the rated scientist's annual productivity rate: this explained more than 40% of the variance in the evaluators' judgements.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gerhard Sonnert (1995) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: