Open nicebread opened 2 weeks ago
How are you using the 'best papers' in the analyses?
What happens if I say that the paper is one of my best, but the score is subjectively one of the worst? Especially if we allow unlimited research outputs, what would be the difference to ranking the later?
It is common that committees ask candidates to (subjectively) nominate their three beset papers. In the rare cases that actually papers from the candidates are read, they are selected from these three.
From a user's point of view, it might be better to have one database of entered articles, and then you select those 10 that you want to submit to a hiring committee (and for the next hiring committee, you make a different selection).
That means, we would need to have two selections: