Why publish?

(Why publish?). This paper forwards an opinion about authors’ and journals’ motivations for scientific writing. Personal and institutional motivations are listed and discussed and, in regard to biodiversity sciences, I propose that a nationalistic motivation is also pertinent in a biodiversity-rich country such as Brazil. Curiosity and competitiveness should be combined for better results. Finally I discuss ground-breaking science within a post-modern perspective, and how the mere act of scientific writing might trigger both scientific and social revolutions.

[1]  Sybille van den Hove,et al.  A Rationale for Science-Policy Interfaces , 2007 .

[2]  F. Scarano.  Perspectives on biodiversity science in Brazil , 2007 .

[3]  David R. B. Stockwell,et al.  Forecasting the Effects of Global Warming on Biodiversity , 2007 .

[4]  John Grace,et al.  The best papers are the boldest , 2007 .

[5]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  National research profiles in a changing Europe (1983–2003) An exploratory study of sectoral characteristics in the Triple Helix , 2007, Scientometrics.

[6]  András Schubert,et al.  Successive h-indices , 2007, Scientometrics.

[7]  Gerard Pasterkamp,et al.  Citation frequency: A biased measure of research impact significantly influenced by the geographical origin of research articles , 2007, Scientometrics.

[8]  Mônica G. Campiteli,et al.  Is it possible to compare researchers with different scientific interests? , 2006, Scientometrics.

[9]  Ying Cheng,et al.  A first approach to the classification of the top 500 world universities by their disciplinary characteristics using scientometrics , 2006, Scientometrics.

[10]  G. Chapron,et al.  Open, Fair, and Free Journal Ranking for Researchers , 2006 .

[11]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  Science in Brazil. Part 1: A macro-level comparative study , 2006, Scientometrics.

[12]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  Science in Brazil. Part 2: Sectoral and institutional research profiles , 2006, Scientometrics.

[13]  J. Hirsch.  An index to quantify an individual's scientific output , 2005 .

[14]  P. E. Oliveira,et al.  Sobre a importância da criação de mestrados profissionais na área de ecologia e meio ambiente , 2005 .

[15]  Not-so-deep impact , 2005, Nature.

[16]  D. King.  The scientific impact of nations , 2004, Nature.

[17]  Scott Frickel,et al.  Science in the Modern World Polity: Institutionalization and Globalization , 2004 .

[18]  M. Holmgren,et al.  Science on the Rise in Developing Countries , 2004, PLoS biology.

[19]  L. de Meis,et al.  The growing competition in Brazilian science: rites of passage, stress and burnout. , 2003, Brazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologicas.

[20]  P. Lawrence.  The politics of publication , 2003, Nature.

[21]  Kofi Annan,et al.  A Challenge to the World's Scientists , 2003, Science.

[22]  Mikhail V. Blagosklonny,et al.  Conceptual biology: Unearthing the gems , 2002, Nature.

[23]  F. Krell.  Why impact factors don't work for taxonomy , 2002, Nature.

[24]  G. Franck.  Scientific Communication--A Vanity Fair? , 1999, Science.

[25]  H. Kokko,et al.  What do impact factors tell us? , 1999, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[26]  J. Ausman.  Can you believe what you read? , 1998, Surgical neurology.

[27]  John S. Gray.  Science and the environment , 1994 .

[28]  J. Ravetz.  Sociology of Science , 1972, Nature.

[29]  Harold Wolff.  The Impact of Society on Science , 1967, Nature.

[30]  T. Kuhn,et al.  The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. , 1964 .