Prolific publishing: Professional and administrative concerns

Abstract

Numerous reports of “prolific publishing” in the communication discipline rank actively publishing researchers, females, administrators, and institutions. We argue that these studies are methodologically weak and may communicate the false message to junior faculty that scholarship is a “numbers game” with academic winners and losers. This essay critiques the notion that quantity of publications, rather than quality, is an appropriate measure of individual or institutional productivity, that prolific publishing garners professional repect or rewards, and that teaching is secondary to publishing.