Spoke to a colleague last night about what works and doesn’t in academic publishing. They were making the case that most work is done by the first and last authors, and so, aside from network effects, usually little cost is incurred by shedding the rest of the list.
Had a similar conversation about supervisors not supporting legacy for profit journals like epidemics but feeling they need to support their staff/students submitting to them. The counter point I guess is tracking paper trajectory to see if that actually matters in the stats.
Had another similar conversation about software papers being a bit pointless and just let people cite the software.
I just had a look for tools etc to do some data analysis on this for an individual or research more generally but in the quick skim I had time for didn’t find anything.
Does anyone know of good resources?