“Publish and Cherish,” not “Publish or Perish”

“Publish or Perish” is a commonly used phrase in academic publishing that reflects the pressure in academia to publish research articles for recognition and career advancement. The phrase also carries a negative connotation, suggesting that failure to publish is equivalent to nonrecognition of the persons involved. Although the origin of this term has been debated, the phrase’s first use is attributed to the American geographer and geomorphologist William Morris Dave (1850–1934) and Clarence Marsh Case (1928).[1] William M. Dave employed the phrase “publish or perish” to encourage individuals to publish, conveying that if something is worth doing, it is worth printing. The first scientific journal, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, was published in 1665 and aimed to distribute scholarly works among professionals, engage in discussion, and archive these for future generations.[2] These were the foundations for the growth and development of scientific journals. As the scientific and academic world expanded, the number of publications in the journal became an essential metric of educational excellence. Over time, the meaning of the phrase “publish or perish” evolved to imply that the absence of numerous publications signifies academic underachievement. They are essential to mark eligibility for promotions in academic careers, research grants, fellowships, and professional recognition. Publications and citations have become the new currency in academia, prompting many researchers to take shortcuts in pursuing these metrics, paving the way for research misconduct. Ghost authorships, gifted authorships, selling authorships, multiple submissions, duplicate publications, and salami slicing are common forms of research misconduct. Fabrication and/or falsification of research data and plagiarism of ideas and texts represent more serious unethical practices.[3] The proliferation of predatory journals willing to publish anything without credible peer review has led to many low-quality “publications” that contribute little to advancing knowledge or science. The troubling impact of this “publish or perish” culture is evident in young researchers, who are pressured into the rat race of publication without proper mentorship on research ethics. Many predatory journals and publications may exploit this vulnerability with promises of “fast” peer review and “quick” publications. To add to the existing conundrum, the recent development of generative artificial intelligence (GAI) and the ability of large language models (LLM) to create abstracts and scientific papers with few prompts have only made matters worse. Currently, most journals have guidelines regarding using GAI and LLM in scientific publications.[4] However, watching for wrongful use of this technology in publications is essential. In a meta-analysis of survey data by Daniele Fanelli, 2% of the researchers admitted having fabricated, falsified, or modified data or results at least once, and up to 33.7% admitted other questionable research practices. Considering that such surveys with sensitive questions about research conduct may not always elicit honest answers, these figures may be a very conservative estimate of the prevalence of scientific misconduct.[5] According to Retraction Watch, a website with a database of retracted scientific articles, as of 2024, there are more than 50,000 retracted research articles in their database.[6] Although honest errors could be the reason for some of these retractions, many involve serious misconduct driven by “publish or perish” culture.[7] If the pursuits of publications override research integrity and honesty, such publications are not advancing knowledge but corrupting it. It is time we examine this phrase of Publish or Perish and consider a paradigm shift toward a more meaningful thinking – ”Publish and Cherish.” This doesn’t mean one should stop or decrease the number of publications, but rather to do so with a true purpose of advancing current knowledge and to fill the current gaps in knowledge. Research should be a meaningful contribution to learning and advancing science rather than a mere stepping stone in an academic career. Cherishing publications implies enjoying the research journey and not just the product, which is, in this case, a publication. Conceptualization of the idea, designing the study protocol, procuring, curating, and analyzing the data honestly and presenting the research work with a clear message in the manuscript, and participating with the review and revision process which are integral to scientific publications are the essential steps of research and publication and a researcher should cherish every step of this journey. A publication to cherish stands under the scrutiny of peer reviewers and editors, inspires others, and stands the test of time. Ignaz Semmelweis (1818–1865), a nineteenth-century Hungarian physician, proposed in 1847 that handwashing with chlorinated lime solutions could reduce puerperal sepsis and maternal mortality. He published his findings in a book in 1861. His ideas and works conflicted with the prevalent medical and scientific opinions and were rejected by the medical community. He suffered a nervous breakdown and was sent to an asylum, where he died in obscurity. Years after his death, his publications earned widespread acceptance with the works of Louis Pasteur and Joseph Lister, providing theoretical explanations to Semmelweis’ observations. The works of Semmelweis, published with a purpose, laid the foundations for modern infection control.[8] He cherished his work because he knew it could save lives, even though the world was not ready to listen to him. This story exemplifies the enduring value of true and impactful research. The responsibility for research integrity and the prevention of scientific misconduct primarily lies with researchers and authors. However, everyone involved in the process has a moral and ethical obligation to uphold these standards. Institutions are accountable for fostering a positive research environment, promoting ethical conduct, and monitoring activities that may infringe upon ethical research and publishing principles. Evaluations for promotions or grants should not be based solely on the quantity of publications but rather on their quality, reproducibility, and impact on science. Research mentors should instruct their mentees on research integrity, ethical conduct, and strategies to prevent misconduct. Education on ethical conduct, oversight of research proposals by an institutional committee, strengthening peer review, and avoiding predatory publishing are crucial measures to prevent scientific misconduct.[9] The editors of a journal play a crucial role in the research process by publishing research outputs as articles. Every paper published becomes part of the scientific record, and the editors are duty-bound to uphold the highest standards of research integrity. The peer review process must be rigorous and fair, aimed at improving the authors’ work. Journal editors can proactively seek out papers that may violate ethical principles and utilise appropriate technologies to detect plagiarism, unacceptable artificial intelligence usage, or image manipulation. Journals should have policies concerning editors who are authors of a manuscript submitted to the journal and must disclose these conflicts of interest. Such editors should also recuse themselves from all decisions regarding the manuscript.[10] Editors should not hesitate to retract articles with misleading, erroneous, or fraudulent content when required.[9] The guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors should serve as guiding principles for journals and authors. Watchful readers of the journal can point out possible misconduct in published articles and engage in postpublication discussions. Let us acknowledge the toll of the “publish or perish” culture on the system and its implications. We need to shift from “publish or perish” to the culture of “Publish and Cherish,” which calls for adherence to values, reaffirmation of ethical principles, and a commitment to the true purpose of research: the pursuit of truth and the betterment of healthcare for society at large. Let us publish not just to survive, but to make a difference. Let us cherish what we publish, and in doing so, we cherish the spirit of science.