Revisions to How to deal with people judging your 'overproductiveness'?

replaced http://academia.stackexchange.com/ with https://academia.stackexchange.com/

Source Link

edited Apr 13, 2017 at 12:49

1

I am in 4th year postdoc working in applied math areas in which 1-3 papers a year is considered a good publication rate. I have been publishing 10-13 papers a year for the last 4-5 years (have never gone for a 'low-quality' journal as considered in my respective areas). I would think that my hardwork would be looked upon in a good way by my colleagues. But I gradually realized that some of my peers have been seeing this publication rate in negative spirit. I keep on having to explain them how I could publish so many papers - that I work hard is not a good answer for them. I feel strange that hardwork is being judged, e.g., the quality of my work, or that my coauthors may have worked harder than me, or that I might have found some low-hanging fruits, etc. I don't know how to deal with such a reverse peer-pressure.

Moreover, sometimes, merely answering that 'I work hard' may be taken offensively by the other person.

Is there any better ways to explain 'overproductivity' to peers, in a non-offending way, how I publish more (and good quality) papers than the average in my field?

This question may be related to Productive but not respected advisor - Should I continue with him?Productive but not respected advisor - Should I continue with him? , though the OP also states that his advisor's citation count was 'too low' which I think is not the case here.

This question is definitely not meant to self-praising nor to demean my colleagues who are generally very nice people. I feel that this issue could come up when searching for permanent job-search and the search committees may also see the record in a wrong way adversely affecting my chances. Hence, the question.

I am in 4th year postdoc working in applied math areas in which 1-3 papers a year is considered a good publication rate. I have been publishing 10-13 papers a year for the last 4-5 years (have never gone for a 'low-quality' journal as considered in my respective areas). I would think that my hardwork would be looked upon in a good way by my colleagues. But I gradually realized that some of my peers have been seeing this publication rate in negative spirit. I keep on having to explain them how I could publish so many papers - that I work hard is not a good answer for them. I feel strange that hardwork is being judged, e.g., the quality of my work, or that my coauthors may have worked harder than me, or that I might have found some low-hanging fruits, etc. I don't know how to deal with such a reverse peer-pressure.

Moreover, sometimes, merely answering that 'I work hard' may be taken offensively by the other person.

Is there any better ways to explain 'overproductivity' to peers, in a non-offending way, how I publish more (and good quality) papers than the average in my field?

This question may be related to Productive but not respected advisor - Should I continue with him? , though the OP also states that his advisor's citation count was 'too low' which I think is not the case here.

This question is definitely not meant to self-praising nor to demean my colleagues who are generally very nice people. I feel that this issue could come up when searching for permanent job-search and the search committees may also see the record in a wrong way adversely affecting my chances. Hence, the question.

I am in 4th year postdoc working in applied math areas in which 1-3 papers a year is considered a good publication rate. I have been publishing 10-13 papers a year for the last 4-5 years (have never gone for a 'low-quality' journal as considered in my respective areas). I would think that my hardwork would be looked upon in a good way by my colleagues. But I gradually realized that some of my peers have been seeing this publication rate in negative spirit. I keep on having to explain them how I could publish so many papers - that I work hard is not a good answer for them. I feel strange that hardwork is being judged, e.g., the quality of my work, or that my coauthors may have worked harder than me, or that I might have found some low-hanging fruits, etc. I don't know how to deal with such a reverse peer-pressure.

Moreover, sometimes, merely answering that 'I work hard' may be taken offensively by the other person.

Is there any better ways to explain 'overproductivity' to peers, in a non-offending way, how I publish more (and good quality) papers than the average in my field?

This question may be related to Productive but not respected advisor - Should I continue with him? , though the OP also states that his advisor's citation count was 'too low' which I think is not the case here.

This question is definitely not meant to self-praising nor to demean my colleagues who are generally very nice people. I feel that this issue could come up when searching for permanent job-search and the search committees may also see the record in a wrong way adversely affecting my chances. Hence, the question.

Question Protected by aeismail

occurred Jun 23, 2015 at 14:30

Tweeted twitter.com/#!/StackAcademia/status/613143626848280576

occurred Jun 23, 2015 at 0:36

added 209 characters in body

Source Link

edited Jun 22, 2015 at 20:04

John

2.2k
4
24
29

I am in 4th year postdoc working in applied math areas in which 1-3 papers a year is considered a good publication rate. I have been publishing 10-13 papers a year for the last 4-5 years (have never gone for a 'low-quality' journal as considered in my respective areas). I would think that my hardwork would be looked upon in a good way by my colleagues. But I gradually realized that some of my peers have been seeing this publication rate in negative spirit. I keep on having to explain them how I could publish so many papers - that I work hard is not a good answer for them. I feel strange that hardwork is being judged, e.g., the quality of my work, or that my coauthors may have worked hardharder than me, or that I might have found some low-hanging fruits, etc. I don't know how to deal with such a reverse peer-pressure. Is

Moreover, sometimes, merely answering that 'I work hard' may be taken offensively by the other person.

Is there any better wayways to convince theexplain 'overproductivity' to peers, in a non-offending way, how I publish more (and good quality) papers than the average in my field? This

This question may be related to Productive but not respected advisor - Should I continue with him? , though the OP also states that his advisor's citation count was 'too low' which I think is not the case here.

This question is definitely not meant to self-praising nor to demean my colleagues who are generally very nice people. I feel that this issue could come up when searching for permanent job-search and the search committees may also see the record in a wrong way adversely affecting my chances. Hence, the question.

I am in 4th year postdoc working in applied math areas in which 1-3 papers a year is considered a good publication rate. I have been publishing 10-13 papers a year for the last 4-5 years (have never gone for a 'low-quality' journal as considered in my respective areas). I would think that my hardwork would be looked upon in a good way by my colleagues. But I gradually realized that some of my peers have been seeing this publication rate in negative spirit. I keep on having to explain them how I could publish so many papers - that I work hard is not a good answer for them. I feel strange that hardwork is being judged, e.g., the quality of my work, or that my coauthors may have worked hard than me, etc. I don't know how to deal with such a reverse peer-pressure. Is there any better way to convince the peers how I publish more (and good quality) papers than the average in my field? This question may be related to Productive but not respected advisor - Should I continue with him? , though the OP also states that his advisor's citation count was 'too low' which I think is not the case here.

This question is definitely not meant to self-praising nor to demean my colleagues who are generally very nice people. I feel that this issue could come up when searching for permanent job-search and the search committees may also see the record in a wrong way adversely affecting my chances. Hence, the question.

I am in 4th year postdoc working in applied math areas in which 1-3 papers a year is considered a good publication rate. I have been publishing 10-13 papers a year for the last 4-5 years (have never gone for a 'low-quality' journal as considered in my respective areas). I would think that my hardwork would be looked upon in a good way by my colleagues. But I gradually realized that some of my peers have been seeing this publication rate in negative spirit. I keep on having to explain them how I could publish so many papers - that I work hard is not a good answer for them. I feel strange that hardwork is being judged, e.g., the quality of my work, or that my coauthors may have worked harder than me, or that I might have found some low-hanging fruits, etc. I don't know how to deal with such a reverse peer-pressure.

Moreover, sometimes, merely answering that 'I work hard' may be taken offensively by the other person.

Is there any better ways to explain 'overproductivity' to peers, in a non-offending way, how I publish more (and good quality) papers than the average in my field?

This question may be related to Productive but not respected advisor - Should I continue with him? , though the OP also states that his advisor's citation count was 'too low' which I think is not the case here.

This question is definitely not meant to self-praising nor to demean my colleagues who are generally very nice people. I feel that this issue could come up when searching for permanent job-search and the search committees may also see the record in a wrong way adversely affecting my chances. Hence, the question.