In 1963, Martin Luther King famously said:

I have a dream that my four little children
will one day live in a nation
where they will not be judged by the color of their skin
but by the content of their character.

In 2015, I would like to say:

I have a dream that my research papers
will one day exist in a
world
where they will not be judged by their journal of publication
but by the content of their equations.

Everyday life is messy and complicated. As human beings, we do not have the capacity to deal with the world in its full-fledged complexity. Instead, we must settle for methods of simplification and coarse-graining in order to cope with the thousands of events and interactions that make up our busy lives. Consider for example the case of a company evaluating the job application of a prospective employee. Like the rest of us, the applicant is a complex individual with dreams, ideas and fears. She cannot be reduced to a few pages of curriculum vitae. And yet, the interviewers are often forced to make this simplification, for they have neither the time nor the resources to do otherwise.

As scientists, we are faced with a similar problem when we attempt to evaluate the quality of a research paper. Ideally, we would read the paper thoroughly and make a careful assessment of its merits. Can we do this every single time? No, we already have our hands full trying to write papers in the first place! What do most of us do instead? We look at the number of citations and the journal of publication. For young articles – which have not had a chance to be cited significantly – it is common to focus only on the journal of publication.

Now let me be perfectly clear about this: there is nothing wrong with making a quick assessment of quality based on the journal of publication. Indeed, these two properties are correlated and as I have explained before, we are often forced to make these types of simplifications. The real problem arises when we forget that it is a crude and frequently incorrect method of assessing quality. Here are two facts to illustrate this point.

Fact 1: Terrible articles have been published in prestigious journals.

My favourite example is this Nature paper: Information transmission under conditions of sensory shielding. It is a comically non-rigorous experiment trying to argue for the possibility of extra-sensory perception. It was quickly debunked. Schroedinger's rat provides some more examples, but I am sure most of the readers can think of some of their own.

Fact 2: Ground-breaking results have been published in obscure journals.

My favourite example is John Bell's original paper introducing his now famous theorem. Another example is Wiesner’s quantum money scheme: a paper which, like many others, was way ahead of its time. After being rejected by several journals, it had to wait 13 years to be published. In fact, during QCMC 2014 – where there was a big debate concerning scientific publishing – the award recipients Nicolas Gisin and Reinhard Werner both publicly stated that none of the articles they consider to be their best were published in prestigious journals.

From these facts we can logically conclude that if we judge a paper by its journal of publication, we will often conclude that some lousy articles are great, and that some excellent papers are mediocre. It is a faulty method which we should only use when forced to, and whose limitations we should always keep in mind. So what is the problem?

The problem is that the scientific community has fooled itself into believing that the quality of a research paper is equivalent to the prestige of its journal of publication.

I am not talking about funding agencies or university administrators who may not have the technical knowledge to judge a paper properly – I am talking about us. I am talking about group leaders assessing applications of postdocs and graduate students. I am talking about students thinking about the merits of their own results. I am talking about postdocs referring to the work of their colleagues. Most of you who are reading these words have probably been guilty of this mistake, myself included, and it is indeed a corrosive error that has become engraved in the way we speak and think about science. Like all forms of prejudice, this flaw in judgement is unfair, discriminatory, and dangerous. It is a serious problem and we have to make it stop.

Consider the following statements which are typical of conversations between researchers. All of them are examples of things I have actually heard.

Actual Statement #1: "I am just happy to have my name appearing in an article in Science".

Actual Statement #2: "This professor in my home university is amazing. She got an article published in Nature!"

Actual Statement #3: "This student has published three PRLs during her PhD. She must be really good."

Actual Statement #4: "You become famous by publishing in Nature and Science."

Actual Statement #5: "That paper is only a PRA."

Actual Statement #6: (To the editors of Nature): "Who are you to decide what the best papers in the world are?"

Actual Statement #7: “But even if you make all those great improvements to the experiment, you will only get in published in IEEE, not in Nature Photonics”.

Actual Statement #8: “I guess my paper is not as good as I thought – it wasn’t accepted in PRL."

Do you see a problem with those statements? I sure do. Do they sound familiar? Of course they do.

As a community, we need to stop thinking along these lines and refrain from using this type of language. We must remind ourselves of a prejudice we have taken too far. We are the ones to blame. Think about how much better it would be to hear the following statements as opposed to the ones listed above:

Better Statement #1: "I am happy to have been part of such a fantastic paper."

Better Statement #2: "This professor in my home university is amazing. She solved a long-standing problem with a very creative new technique!"

Better Statement #3: "This student has published three PRLs during her PhD."

Better Statement #4: "You become famous when you are responsible for ground-breaking results that are widely recognized by your peers."

Better Statement #5: "That paper is a PRA."

Better Statement #6: (To the editors of Nature): "Who are you to decide what papers get published in Nature?"

Better Statement #7: “But even if you make all those great improvements to the experiment, aren’t you afraid people will not see it as innovative?”

Actual Statement #8: “My paper is as good as it always has been, even if it wasn’t accepted in PRL."

I am definitely not the only one speaking out about this issue. Carlton Caves has written a masterful column about what he calls the ‘High-impact-factor Syndrome’. Valerio Scarani has also blogged about this before. So why do I say the same things again but in different words? Because I believe that the more of us that speak out, the higher the chance we have of actually making a difference. Much like the problem of judging people based on their skin colour or sexual orientation, this is an issue that arises from a flaw in our mentality, and it is hard to change mentalities with isolated arguments. We need several people to repeat the argument many times.

If you think I am exaggerating the importance of this issue, allow me to persuade you otherwise. The stakes are very high - we are talking about people's careers and the integrity of science! Do we want to steer innovative and creative young scientists away from a research career because their results are not of enough general interest to appear in Science? Do we want to incentivize scientists to be dishonest in order to boost their chances of getting their papers accepted in PRL? Do we want an environment where so much energy is spent working on over-hyped topics instead of pushing science forward? Do we want to be part of a community that judges the accomplishments of its members based on a form of prejudice?

I would like to invite you all to raise your consciousness on this issue and to recognize the role that you can play. Please think twice before you convince yourself that a paper can’t be any good unless it appears in a top journal. Please be careful when you speak about a scientist’s worth based only on how many of her articles appear in these journals. Please find some time to read the papers of the people who apply to your group. Please remember that the quality of your work is unchanged whether it gets accepted or rejected by a particular journal. Please help me make our community an even more enjoyable place to do science.

Comments

I do not know if it's just me or if perhaps everybody else encountering problems with your website. It appears as though some of the written text in your content are running off the screen. Can somebody else please comment and let me know if this is happening to them too? This may be a issue with my web browser because I've had this happen before. Appreciate it

Which browser are you using? We seem to have no problems with Safari or Firefox. Does the same issue happen with other University of Waterloo sites?

I will right away clutch your rss feed as I can't to find your e-mail subscription link or e-newsletter service. Do you've any? Please allow me realize so that I may subscribe. Thanks.

Hi Trimaleana - Go to https://uwaterloo.ca/institute-for-quantum-computing/blog. In the top right corner you will see "Subscribe to blog feed". Click on that and you should be good to go.

Oh my goodness! Amazing article dude! Thank you so much, However I

am experiencing problems with your RSS. I don't understand why I can't subscribe to

it. Is there anybody else getting identical RSS problems?

Anybody who knows the solution will you kindly respond?

Thanks!!



My website ... Oro Lift Skincare

Which browser are you using? I've tested subscribing to the RSS in both Safari and Firefox and they both work.

Great delivery. Great arguments. Keep up the amazing spirit.

Thank you for the kind words, they mean a lot to me :) 

I pay a visit everyday a few web pages and information sites to read articles, but this blog provides quality based posts.

Thank you for your comment. If there's a specific topic that you would like to see covered, please let us know and we will try to find a researcher that can cover it.

Thank you! We will continue to work hard to generate great content :)

Great article! This is the kind of info that should be shared across the internet. Shame on Google for now not positioning this put up upper! Come on over and visit my web site . Thanks =)

Thanks we appreciate your enthusiasm. We hope with more blog posts that we will move up on the Google search.

Thank you! It's not easy to get to the top of Google searches, but we are doing our best!

A effectively researched hub on this topic and absolutely an exceptional effort put into this info most beneficial and a valuable to all readers.

Thank you! It is precisely the potential to benefit people around the world that motivates me to take the time and share my ideas :)

Just want to say your article is as amazing. The clarity in your post is just great and i can assume you're an expert on this subject. Fine with your permission allow me to grab your feed to keep up to date with forthcoming post. Thanks a million and please keep up the enjoyable work.

We'll definitely continue to generate content. We are fortunate to have a large number of brilliant scientists willing to share their ideas with the world :)

Hello there! This is my 1st comment here so I just wanted to give a quick shout out and tell you I really enjoy reading through your articles. Can you recommend any other blogs/websites/forums that go over the same topics? Thank you so much!

Two really great ones are:

http://quantumfrontiers.com/

http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/

Sean Carroll sometimes writes about quantum mechanics on his blog: preposterousuniverse.com/blog

Also, I have my personal blog, where I write about topics not necessarily related to quantum information: 

https://qonaom.wordpress.com/

Feel free to visit!

Your means of describing the whole thing in this piece of writing is genuinely good, all can without difficulty know it, Thanks a lot.

You're welcome! Thank you for the kind words :)

Great post. I will be experiencing many of these issues as well..

Thank you! And remeber: you will also be experiencing the great joys of doing research!

I ennjoy reading an article that will make people think. Also, thanks for permitting me to comment!

You're welcome. It's important to us that people can comment on our blog posts.

Hi, all is going well here and ofcourse every one is sharing facts, that's really fine, keep up writing.

Thank you! Will do!

I love reading through a post that will make people think. Also, thank you for permitting me to comment!

That is exactly the point: make people think! I'm gald you think that goal was met :)

Howdy! This article couldn't be written any better! Looking through this article reminds me of my previous roommate! He always kept talking about this. I'll send this information to him. Pretty sure he will have a very good read. Thank you for sharing!

Hahaha, I always think I can write even better, but I'm happy to hear you say otherwise. Thank you for sharing too: we really hope to reach as many people as possible :)

Hi theгe would you mind stating which blog latform you'reworking witҺ? I'm going to start my own blߋg soon but I'm having a tough time choosing between BlogEngine/Wordpress/Β2evolution aand Drupal. The reasln I ask is becauhse yoսr design seems different tthen most blogs and I'm looҝing for something unique. P.S My apologies for being off-tօpic but I had to ask!

Hello! We're actually using a Drupal-driven content management system that has been customized for the University of Waterloo. The blog is a feature that has recently been added to the system.

We are a bunch of volunteers and opening a new scheme in our community. Your site offered us with useful information to work on. You've done an impressive process and our whole neighborhood will probably be thankful to you.

Thank you! We started a committee here at IQC with 1 staff member (myself), 1 faculty member, 1 postdoc and 1 graduate student so that we could work together to encourage our researchers to write posts that we would then release every two weeks. If there are any specific topics you'd like to see, let us know and we'll find someone to write about it.

I really love your blog.. Excellent colors & theme. Did you make this web site yourself? Please reply back as I'm trying to create my own personal site and would love to learn where you got this from or what the theme is named. Thanks!

Thank you. We're using a Drupal-driven content management system that has been customized by the University of Waterloo and then we've had the IQC portion of the site customized with our branding - it doesn't use an off-the-shelf theme.

What's up everyone, it's my first go to see at this website, and post is in fact fruitful in support of me, keep up posting these posts.
Howdy just wanted to give you a brief heads up and let you know a few of the pictures aren't loading properly. I'm not sure why but I think its a linking issue. I've tried it in two different web browsers and both show the same results.
Thanks for your comments. Can you let me know which blog post contains the photos that you had trouble with and which browsers?
Have you ever thought about including a little bit more than just your articles? I mean, what you say is valuable and everything. But imagine if you added some great pictures or video clips to give your posts more, "pop"! Your content is excellent but with pics and videos, this site could undeniably be one of the very best in its field. Wonderful blog!

Thank you very much for the compliment! A couple of our other blog posts contain some imagery, but we definitely want to encourage our researchers to use more, and video would be even video.

Keep on working, great job!
I'm really inspired along with your writing abilities and also with the layout on your blog. Is that this a paid topic or did you modify it yourself? Either way stay up the nice high quality writing, it is rare to look a nice blog like this one today..

This is not a paid topic. All posts on this blog are written by IQC members - we will not be considering paid topics.

It's not my first time to pay a quick visit this site, i am visiting this website dailly and obtain pleasant facts from here all the time.

Thanks Derick. I'm glad you find the site useful. If there are any specific topics you'd like to know more about, please let us know.

Appreciating the persistence you put into your website and detailed information you offer. It's nice to come across a blog every once in a while that isn't the same old rehashed information. Wonderful read! I've bookmarked your site and I'm including your RSS feeds to my Google account.

Pages

Blog topics

  1. 2016 (21)
    1. November (1)
    2. October (1)
    3. September (2)
    4. August (3)
    5. July (2)
    6. June (2)
    7. May (2)
    8. April (2)
    9. March (3)
    10. February (2)
    11. January (1)
  2. 2015 (16)
    1. December (1)
    2. November (2)
    3. October (2)
    4. September (2)
    5. August (2)
    6. July (2)
    7. June (3)
    8. May (2)

Educational programs

QKD - Quantum Key Distribution Summer School

USEQIP - Undergraduate School on Experimental Quantum Information Processing

QCSYS - Quantum Cryptography School for Young Students

Quantum Innovators logo

Schrödinger's Class button