Most research is meaningless and should be neither published nor celebrated. It’s conducted to learn how to do research and to practice doing “science,” but mostly to pad CVs. The process is a bit like students writing papers for their high school or college English classes  – it has to be done in order to finish the class, but the papers should almost never be read by anyone but the teacher and the student.

Unfortunately, our research journals are filled with research papers and studies that read like amateurish sophomore high school papers, and have even less value in terms of scientific merit. Imagine if every single English paper were published in journals!

The lust for a long CV has encouraged all sorts of machinations, none of them good. Garbage research, garbage publications, garbage volunteerism, garbage activities – none of which make a meaningful difference.

It’s okay to do research for the sake of research, just don’t publish it.

Also like CVs, our body of published research doesn’t tell the whole story: only the stuff we think is good, the successes and wins, are listed. We don’t put all the failures and catastrophes. The result is a hugely biased perspective for the consumer.


Hi, guest!