<p>For people in the sciences how do you know if the PI has a good publishing record?
ie. what academic journals are good and which ones are not soo good?
I know that Science, Nature and Cell are some really good publications for PIs to have but what other are there?
Also any advice on how to select potential PIs?
What is your criteria? </p>
<p>thanks everyone =)</p>
<p>don’t just look at high impact papers when judging a PI. of course there are uninteresting papers in nature all the time. instead, look at the number of citations the papers receive. you can log onto ISI if you have access to it and try to gauge if people actually care about the PIs work.</p>
<p>Beside those top 3 journals, every field has its own good journal, so it will depend on what field you’re talking about. The quality of academic journals are usually measured by their “impact factors”. higher the impact factor –> better journal. It’s not an absolute standard but it can give you some ideas about the quality of the journal. just google “name of journal” + impact factor.</p>
<p>I usually also check the amount of funding received by the PIs. PIs with good publishing records tend to have more funding. For biomedical related field, you can check it online. Go to NIH reporter: [Query</a> Form - NIH RePORTER ? NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tool Expenditures and Results](<a href=“RePORT ⟩ RePORTER”>RePORT ⟩ RePORTER)
But, of course, keep in mind that NIH is not the only source of funding.</p>
<p>I second the suggestion of NIH RePORTER, as well as the NIH CRISP database. CRISP has much of the same information, but may also be helpful in providing more information about the quality of the department overall and the PI’s standing in that department. Definitely look for someone with consistent R01 code NIH funding. HHMI grants are also an indication of success. Of course, simply googling the name can be revealing as well. </p>
<p>Bear in mind that while the profile and (departmental) political position of the PI counts for a lot, the working relationship you have with them is just as important. “Training” under a Nobel laureate who never learned your name or outright dislikes you might not get you as far as a generally well-respected PI that you really click with.</p>
<p>Also, remember even the top three journals publish total crap from time to time!</p>
<p>thanks guys! im gonna try the ISI and see what comes up. I was never really keen on training with the an “academic superstar” since i know that person is probably too busy to pay attention to my needs. instead i look for someone who has a good set of publications, # of graduate students and someone who i could easily talk to and share my ideas with and also someone who has funds.</p>
<p>There’s also the H-index (or H-number) for the sciences, although I don’t know where one finds the numbers already calculated. It measures not just citations, but also the number of papers that have received the same number of citations. For example, an H-index of 20 means that a PI has written 20 papers that have been cited by others at least 20 times. Yes, he may have one paper that was cited 100 times, and one that was never cited, but they don’t count. The higher the number, the (supposed) greater long-term impact of the research. You can only compare H-index’s within fields, however, since publication rates vary from field to field.</p>
<p>Superstars are easy to pick out. Look up who in the department is a Howard Hughes investigator or in the National Academy of Sciences. For younger or less obvious superstars, you kinda just have to learn your field. Has this person published frequently in good journals? Have they written a lot of review articles? What is their funding situation (google crisp and look up their grants).</p>
<p>If you don’t have access to ISI database, just use google scholar.
Using that screen, you can also see what other types of journals are citing the PI’s publications. However, if you are new to a field, consult with faculty in your local area about their assessment of a PIs standing in their field. Last, check out some of the first authors on the PIs publications. Check how many of them are still publishing well. This is a useful indicator not only of a PIs productivity, but their ability to mentor.</p>