2015
DOI: 10.1590/198053143597
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Produtivismo acadêmico, publicação em periódicos e qualidade das pesquisas

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

0
6
0
6

Year Published

2017
2017
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
6
0
6
Order By: Relevance
“…This practice is not the most adequate way to enhance academic knowledge, since the pressure to publish unrestrainedly, at any means, distorts the objectives of a publication, which must be always connected to true research results and to fully performed studies (7) . Kuhlman (7) also suggests the word publicationism for the practice of quick and fragmented publications of articles that do not contribute for the knowledge and that have as their sole reason to increase production indicators, interfering with the researchers' activities.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This practice is not the most adequate way to enhance academic knowledge, since the pressure to publish unrestrainedly, at any means, distorts the objectives of a publication, which must be always connected to true research results and to fully performed studies (7) . Kuhlman (7) also suggests the word publicationism for the practice of quick and fragmented publications of articles that do not contribute for the knowledge and that have as their sole reason to increase production indicators, interfering with the researchers' activities.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This factors create demands for the number of publications that researchers must publish, causing an academic productivism (7) , which may lead to the production of low quality scientific articles and to the "salami science".…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Another criticism concerns the linkage between the actions of evaluation and financing of the SNPG, a system based on rewards and punishments for the performance of programs to guarantee the entrance/exit, elevation/preservation/fall of concepts, number of scholarships, and volume of financial aid, among others. On the other hand, despite having stimulated the expansion and qualification of postgraduation, the process may also be contributing to the persistence of imbalances and inequalities between researchers, programs, institutions, and regions [15,16,24,25,[28][29][30][31][32][33]. Regarding the methodology used by the SNPG to classify journals (Qualis journals), the specific object of this work, a good portion of the selected literature considers that the assessment process of CAPES overvalues the quantitative over the qualitative and the international over the national/ local [15][16][17]20,21,[24][25][26][27]31,33].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The evaluation of the SNPG, performed to include publications occurring from 2004 to 2016, identified and selected 22 articles on such theme. It is noteworthy that of these 22 articles, 10 address aspects related to the possibilities and limitations of the SNPG as a whole; therefore, they are characterized as articles on the evaluation of the multidisciplinary group of 48 knowledge areas recognized by the system [7, [24][25][26][28][29][30][32][33][34]. Four articles are related to the Public Health knowledge area [16,19,20,23]; three to the area of Education [14,15,18]; two to the area of Psychology [17,21]; one to the Humanities and Social Sciences [27]; one to the area of Physical Education [22]; and one to the area of History [31].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recent studies have described and analyzed the changes that have occurred in the scientific field in the last years and that also affect the Brazilian educational field. The most evident feature which has drawn more attention is the affirmation of the so-called performativity culture, based on an environment of intense competition, which expresses the permeability of the scientific field as to market demands and characteristics (BALL, 2005;MOREIRA, 2009;KUHLMANN, 2015).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%