Congrats Mike and Julia!

Old habits die hard..

Maybe there will be a time when tools like QED will be used, with vetting by scientific panels, to perform some kind of standardized ‘summaries’ of candidates’ contributions.

Hence we correlate candidate’s ability to attract funding to their track record of publishing papers in highly selective journals run for profit, where professional editors make the decisions.

Major factor is time and effort required for assessment of someone’s science, especially a ‘shortlist’ of 20-30 candidates. Almost always within the tight deadlines, it is impossible to read everyone’s papers AND make an objective assessment of candidate’s contribution in multi-author publications.

It is achievable to change this culture, but funders, especially major ones, must take the lead. HHMI, for example, took a step in this direction by requiring the removal of journal names from bibliographies (including during talks) and assessment materials.