True, but I feel like abuse would be fairly obvious and grant panels would know if someone is gaming the system. The panels, at least in my former field, are composed mostly of people who know who’s doing what in their field. If they saw a high citation count they would know if that was legitimate. If anything, faking citations would be shameful and embarrassing for most people.
Your peers would know and they’d think you’re pathetic. There’d be nothing to gain.
If grants are tied to the “score” there is an incentive to abuse the system.
True, but I feel like abuse would be fairly obvious and grant panels would know if someone is gaming the system. The panels, at least in my former field, are composed mostly of people who know who’s doing what in their field. If they saw a high citation count they would know if that was legitimate. If anything, faking citations would be shameful and embarrassing for most people.
and similarly, any metric tied to a reward is no longer a metric worth measuring for the purposes of maintaining system health
On GitHub there is a tracker for how many commits you make in a year, but it’s super easy to fake. But it’s also pretty obvious when you fake it haha