One of the letters echoes a surprisingly widespread notion that citation analysis encourages mediocrity, or "consensus science." The writer asks: "If success is measured by citation analysis, won't scientists shy away from original and venturesome fields that don't produce strong citation records?" That is, will scientists abandon an exciting, potentially ground-breaking project or area of study that, when reported on, is unlikely to gain immediate attention from other researchers?
For responsible, intellectually honest scientists, the notion of statistics functioning as a determinant, rather than a reflection, of behavior is absurd. Of course, a few dubiously motivated researchers, hoping to grab in any way they can the attention of department heads or potential employers, will seek out any device that may enhance their name recognition and beef up their c.v.'s. But this is clearly an abuse of citation analysis. Blaming a measurement method for its abuses is like blaming a badly ...
