Should a big research (e.g., PhD) be published as one comprehensive high-impact paper or several smaller, faster publications?
Should a big study perhaps a PhD student’s research be published as one comprehensive, high-impact paper or split into several smaller, focused publications? A single major paper can offer a cohesive, in-depth contribution with broader impact, but may delay dissemination. Multiple smaller papers can communicate findings more quickly and stimulate ongoing research, yet may lack the unified context of a larger work. What choice is the best - having a comprehensive paper in high impact journals like Nature or Science or multiple papers in smaller journals. Which one is the best for the scientific progress, public understanding, and the accessibility of research, and for student?
Manayesh Bantie
In my opinion it depends on the cons and prons of the research paper. Depends on:
The type of journals it published
The long term influence of the paper in the area
The risk of rejection and
Times take to publish
The type of journals it published
The long term influence of the paper in the area
The risk of rejection and
Times take to publish
Kamyar
In my opinion, quality is more important than quantity. So, one precise, fluent, and comprehensive paper is more valuable.
Jasim Hassen
The PhD thesis should preferably be divided into more than one paper, especially since some chapters may differ from each other in their scientific content.
Milton Mendonça
The current model for scientific publishing can accomodate either situation, however it is more common to find journals accepting focussed publications than longer, integrative ones. The impact factor of many journals of the latter type can be rather high. The rest is strategy. Scientific progress can come from either situation, you are supposed to read everything in the literature; however it is easier if you find lots of info on a single source. Public understanding can gain from either, however in my opinion well placed and interpreted snippets of info can do better than a single monolithic appraisal of a source (the general public tires so easily). In terms of accesssibility, it is all the same with so much variation among journals from free access to high cost paywalls. For a student, again it can be either: a Nature paper is surely the star of a CV, however many papers mean more experience with publishing and making sense of specific scientific findings. Make your choice.
Alvass
PhD should publish a couple of high impact papers. No need to rush and publish several, and it is a PhD again no need for a big paper that will take many many years
SaeedKaboli
Depends on goals and field; a single high-impact paper can be a prestige maximizer, especially for a PhD, but having several smaller articles increases your chances of having a high number of publications and prevents you from being seen at all. If the research is very novel, it is better to publish in one high-impact paper; however, if there is less time to get the achievement seen, better to aim for multiple small papers.