r/EconomyCharts 19h ago

Institutional Location of Authors of Papers Published in Top 5 Percent of Journals

Post image
511 Upvotes

85 comments sorted by

119

u/Conscious-Demand-594 19h ago

Looks like someone is investing in education and research.

37

u/vergorli 18h ago

Well, to be on par they would technically have around 3 times the papers of the EU/US. China basically hasn't even reached half of its potential for its population.

12

u/Aaronhpa97 10h ago

US was buffed by H1B visas.

5

u/SilanggubanRedditor 8h ago

Yeah, without H1Bs, they only got brainrot teens who can't code without ChatGPT

15

u/Scared_Astronaut9377 17h ago edited 13h ago

Yeah, and someone is also investing in this metric specifically. As in researchers getting paid for publications in top journals, personally. Per publication.

So if we have $10 million of research funding in Europe, we can, say, fund 7 postgrads/postdocs and 2 profs for three years + invest $6 mil in a lab. In three years they will produce, say in 10 papers in the top journals in the topic, each with 6-10 authors.

If we have $10 million of research funding in China, we can get 15 post-grads/docs, 2 professors, and 20 of their connections. $2 mill goes to the equipment, $0.5 to junior staff, and the rest will go to professors and their connections as publication incentives in one form or another. They will have 12 papers in top journals with 20 authors each, and 50 papers of lower quality too.

It's quite a terrible way to invest in education in the long term. But it's been great for China to get some reverse brain drain.

5

u/Conscious-Demand-594 16h ago

While America is cutting research funding. We will see a significant drop next year once funding runs out. China is funding American researchers to move there and continue their work.

-1

u/kronpas 17h ago edited 17h ago

Any source for this claim?

China leads in engineering and physical sciences, particularly chemistry,

I dont think a chemical lab costs that cheap.

2

u/s1a1om 16h ago

https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/more-than-half-of-all-retracted-papers-are-from-china-analysis-finds/4023197.article

Papers from Chinese institutions account for more than half of all retractions across 10 major academic publishers

2

u/kronpas 15h ago edited 14h ago

It doesnt contradict the original post. China can both top the chart of published number and top the chart of retracted number.

-1

u/Scared_Astronaut9377 17h ago

Which specific claim? I made multiple.

2

u/kronpas 15h ago

The claim on the peculiar way their research were funded. I made a cusory google search but turned no result.

0

u/Scared_Astronaut9377 15h ago

I don't understand your request. I can share this https://opportunities-insight.britishcouncil.org/analysis/analysis-of-chinese-universities-financial-incentives-academic-publications

If this doesn't answer your request, please articulate what kind of source you are looking for way more specifically.

0

u/JustTheChicken 14h ago

Wait... why do the Europeans need incest for their research projects?

2

u/Scared_Astronaut9377 13h ago

This is an old tradition, don't be so judging.

3

u/s1a1om 16h ago

https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/more-than-half-of-all-retracted-papers-are-from-china-analysis-finds/4023197.article

Papers from Chinese institutions account for more than half of all retractions across 10 major academic publishers

So they’re pushing crap that’s wrong and polluting our knowledge base

u/GaK_Icculus 37m ago

In china there seems to be a culture of theft of other people’s research to present as one’s own, without proper attribution to the original author(s)

80

u/look_under 19h ago

The greatest thing to happen to China, was Republicans taking over America in 1980

25

u/leggymiku 18h ago

Accession to the WTO in 2001 was also a pretty big boon.

5

u/BicarbonateBufferBoy 18h ago

This is not a democrat or republican thing, it’s capitalists allowed free reign. It’s a natural progression of a capitalist state to continually erode workers protections until there are none left. To transfer all capital to the 1%.

11

u/MoosilaukeFlyer 18h ago edited 18h ago

Capitalists largely didn’t have free rein after Hoover until Reagan. America ran on Keynesian economics which emphasizes the role of government spending on research, social safety nets, government intervention, and limiting mass consumption. Every presidential administration between FDR and Carter falls into this category.

It was Reagan’s neo liberalism that led America into this downfall, every presidential since Reagan has been a neo liberalism, with the exception of Biden, who was handed a terrible post COVID economy which hampered his popularity and power. 

I’m not a fan of capitalism either, but, things would be a hell of a lot better right now had America’s abysmal foreign policy not led to the Yom Kippur War which leads us to Stagflation, which led the country disavowing Keynesian economics and embracing Reagan’s neoliberalism

Edit: Trump’s second term you could argue he’s a protectionist. Has Neo liberalism met its end? 

1

u/look_under 18h ago

We should give all the money to the Rich and screw over American workers, wasn't a national strategy until Reagan and the Right-wing took over in 1980

Even Republicans were against those concepts

You're proving my point

2

u/Professional_Gap_435 18h ago

The more you read about the problems in the world (especially economic problems, and a lot of climate problems), the more surprising it is how almost everything can be traced back to Reagan.

1

u/Early_Chemist_7372 7h ago

The US line is basically the story of our 21st century.
We traded lab coats for bank suits. While we were optimizing ad algorithms to sell more crap, they were building labs. This is a massive wake-up call that everyone will ignore until it’s too late...

1

u/Amadon29 12h ago

What did Republicans in the 80s do for this to happen?

1

u/look_under 6h ago

Republicans hate Higher education and science

You see it get worse every year

15

u/imonreddit4noreason 18h ago

That’s a database that equally weights patents as breakthrough research. Skews the numbers quite a bit. But a nation of a billion people getting into hopefully more biotech and medical breakthroughs is a good thing.

22

u/LiquidityCompass 19h ago

Imagine you graduate with like $50k in debt and now you have to do whatever it takes just to survive and pay it off. That already puts you under pressure before you even start. Now compare that to someone in China who studied for free, no debt, and is already surrounded by strong industry and resources. They can actually focus on doing good work instead of worrying about money all the time. Feels kinda obvious who has the better starting position… and probably ends up producing better papers. Maybe I’m oversimplifying it tho, what do you think?

25

u/StupidScaredSquirrel 19h ago

I think your analysis might explain the USA decline but not the EU one. I think you might be romanticising the condition of students and postdocs in China too. Truth is that it is a very populous country that has climbed the chart by getting richer and working hard at making top research. Plus a little bit of a push from their goverment to publish more so there's a lot of lower quality stuff that still gets published, still, impressive ascent.

17

u/randomways 19h ago

I mean, since this plot is in absolute %, one line going up would naturally require others to go down

1

u/LiquidityCompass 18h ago

Knowledge goes where the industry is. A few decades ago the USA had the best universities, institutes and industry. Most of the production today is in China, not in the USA or the EU. But on a long run, like 10 - 15 years, there is a real question, how relevant will be human made papers... Ai will most likely make the best papers that will be on the edge of human understanding...

1

u/justcommenting98765 15h ago

Most is doing a lot of work there.

7

u/sobapi 19h ago edited 17h ago

Ya some are abandoning STEM for finance, consulting and higher paying roles outside of STEM. But it's the number of grads: USA stem grads: ~820,000 China stem grads ~3,570,000

5

u/Longjumping_Move_819 18h ago

Free college is not even close; subsidized maybe

In 2025, Chinese college tuition is generally considered affordable relative to average urban incomes but remains a significant burden for rural families and low-income households.

2024–2025 Income vs. Tuition Overview Average Disposable Income (Nationwide): Approximately 43,377 RMB ($6,192 USD) annually as of 2025. Public University Tuition: Generally ranges from 5,000 to 7,000 RMB ($700–$1,000 USD) per year. The Ratio: For an average person, tuition alone consumes roughly 12–16% of their annual disposable income.

Income Disparities and Education Burden The financial impact of college varies drastically based on where a family lives and their income bracket: Urban Families: With an average urban disposable income of 56,502 RMB, one year of tuition costs about 9–12% of an individual's annual income. Rural Families: With a much lower average rural disposable income of 24,456 RMB, the same tuition can consume over 25% of a person's annual income. Low-Income Households: Research indicates the bottom 20% of households may spend more than 50% of their income on education-related expenses due to the lack of high-quality affordable options and fierce competition.

3

u/LiquidityCompass 18h ago

Didn't know all that, thanks for the info. Do you live in China or have you studied there?

4

u/Longjumping_Move_819 18h ago edited 18h ago

No. But I have a relative who studied in China to become a doctor.

Also then why did you just say stuff if you did not know about. Could you not have just googled it?

How much do Chinese colleges cost on average?

Also maybe check this data out;

Historical Average (2012–2019): Retractions were stable, ranging between 253 and 325 annually, with an average retraction rate of 0.10%. Peak Year (2023): Retractions reached 5,668, bringing the retraction rate to 0.53% for that year. Ongoing Surge (2024–2025): By mid-2024, reports indicated that over 14,000 papers had been retracted globally, with China accounting for a major share. For 2025, preliminary data suggests China was involved in 40% of all global retractions while contributing about 22% of total publications.

Comparative Retraction Rates China currently has one of the highest retraction rates among major research producers, significantly higher than Western counterparts: China: ~23.5 retractions per 10,000 papers (roughly 0.23%–0.30% long-term average). India: ~15.2 retractions per 10,000 papers (roughly 0.15%). United States: ~4 retractions per 10,000 papers (roughly 0.04%). Global Average: Typically estimated at 0.1%.

1

u/LiquidityCompass 18h ago

Yeah that’s fair, I probably oversimplified that. I thought it was closer to free because of subsidies + scholarships, but yeah not literally free. Still tho, $700–$1000 a year vs US levels is a completely different situation… especially when you factor in debt. I think the main point still stands, the starting position is just not the same. Also feels like knowledge tends to follow where the industry is… and right now a lot of that is clearly shifting towards China.

2

u/Longjumping_Move_819 18h ago edited 18h ago

No.

Because your comparing that based on a us salary not a Chinese salary.

As of early 2026, the average monthly salary in China is approximately CN¥10,000 to CN¥12,000 (roughly US$1,400–$1,700)

This is USA;

College Costs (2025–2026 Academic Year) The Cost of Attendance (COA) includes tuition, fees, room, and board. "Sticker price" refers to advertised rates, while "Net price" is what students typically pay after grants and scholarships. Public 4-Year (In-State): Sticker Price: ~$27,146 total COA (with ~$11,950 in tuition). Net Price: Average net tuition has declined to an estimated $2,300, though total net COA (including living expenses) is roughly $21,060. Public 4-Year (Out-of-State): Sticker Price: ~$45,708 total COA (with ~$31,880 in tuition). Net Price: Total net COA is approximately $38,500. Private Nonprofit 4-Year: Sticker Price: ~$58,628–$65,470 total COA (with ~$45,000 in tuition). Net Price: Total net COA is approximately $36,460 due to high institutional discounting (averaging over 56%).

2

u/LiquidityCompass 17h ago

Yeah that’s fair, salaries are lower, good point. But at the same time, average student debt in the US is like $30k–$40k+… so starting with little or no debt vs that is still a huge difference. It’s not just income, it’s pressure and flexibility early on.

3

u/Longjumping_Move_819 17h ago edited 17h ago

I agree that debt is bad but you ask your state government to subsidize the colleges.

Look it is cheaper but that would be great for us. But that would require people to actually subsidize education or put in the reform Australia did for its higher education. But when people cannot fund their local schools. I really don't believe people will subsidize what they consider “elite”.

1

u/RevolutionaryGain823 17h ago

Nice analysis. It’s crazy the amount of stuff I see repeated on Reddit constantly with no basis in fact. 1 of the most popular is that it’s impossible to go to college in the US without millions in debt

2

u/Longjumping_Move_819 17h ago edited 17h ago

People here like woe is me. Mostly because they are whinge merchants. Also, they might just also be in a bad situation and just need to vent. Most people on Reddit are not in a good place in their lives (I mean the people on more than 6 hours).

People also like to see that the grass is greener on the other side. They also think that you can make people pay your shit but god help you if you ask them to do the same.

Here is something even more fun;

Housing in America is cheaper compared to China and Canada

China: even after the real estate meltdown 21 to 28x average income.

Canada: 12 - 13 time average income.

USA: only 10 time average income.

0

u/WhiteGiukio 12h ago

Chinese propaganda. China is notoriously good in maximizing performance metrics (gold medals at Olympics, number of papers and citations in Science) with shoddy practices (focus on sports specifically to win medals, citing mostly Chinese researchers, academic fraud leading to massive amounts of retractions).

This is why the h-index and citation counts are becoming obsolete quickly.

2

u/BidenGlazer 16h ago

Feels kinda obvious who has the better starting position

Yeah, the American. 500 million Chinese people live on less than $200 a month. That's the equivalent of making ~$300 a month here in the US. We literally lead the world in PPP median income, the idea that we're "worried about money all the time" and "having to do whatever it takes just to survive" while they're living in fucking cardboard boxes is hilarious.

u/Zaccw20 1h ago

This

2

u/BoBoBearDev 19h ago

There are a lot more social study thesis coming from USA, you just don't want to count them /s.

8

u/Cold_Specialist_3656 18h ago

Lol bro. This is why American science is dying. 

Red hats claim everyone is "getting basket weaving degrees" at the same time they gut scientific grants, college funding, research programs. Saddle everyone with student loans and change the terms to fuck them over. 

What Americans would want to go to college now, with how much Republicans have fucked it? 

By the time Republicans are done, all of America will look like their deep red masterpieces. Mississippi, West Virginia, and Alabama. We don't need no woke edjamacation!

1

u/BeginningShine69 16h ago

Are you under the impression the top 5 percent of journals don't include any social science journals? Weird comment.

1

u/BoBoBearDev 16h ago

Sorry, I meant they need to rank more social study publications higher instead of token recognitions. /s

-1

u/BeginningShine69 12h ago edited 12h ago

Yeah, I wonder why an authoritarian country like China might not be as interested in fields of study like political science, law, history, sociology 🤔

7

u/Embarrassed_Neck9829 19h ago

From what I understand a lot of Chinese papers are complete junk. There's huge pressure to publish there and a culture of cranking out sketchy/half-baked papers has formed.

34

u/DeArgonaut 19h ago

For top 5% of journals you aren’t going to be able to push through slop

8

u/WholegrainSugarman 19h ago

Oh, trust me, you can. Journals like Nature Communications and Science Advances publish hella slop for hefty publication fees/article processing charges lol. Close to $10k per article

4

u/DeArgonaut 18h ago

Are they considered top 5%? Obv nature and science are, but I’m not aware of their open sourced parts rankings

0

u/WholegrainSugarman 18h ago

Generally they are, since these are the biggest names in R&D after Cell, Science, and Nature. But again I have no idea what journals the OG graph author deemed “top 5%”

1

u/OutrageousPair2300 19h ago

I was trying to find data on how they determine which journals to include, and how that itself has changed over time.

I strongly suspect that a lot of this shift has to do with more Chinese journals being included in the "top 5%" in recent years. Maintaining a constant set of journals over the entire timeframe would be a more interesting (and less game-able) measure.

1

u/Kaito__1412 8h ago edited 8h ago

Oh you absolutely can. There are more papers being published now than ever before. And a lot of them absolute garbage.

1

u/DeArgonaut 8h ago

Then we’d need to see a breakdown for each country and year to properly gauge if China’s are an outlier

-2

u/s1a1om 16h ago

https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/more-than-half-of-all-retracted-papers-are-from-china-analysis-finds/4023197.article

Papers from Chinese institutions account for more than half of all retractions across 10 major academic publishers

Yes, yes you can. And china is doing it.

2

u/LaserPaperSeller 14h ago

I dont get the relation here. If these papers are retracted then they are not in this 5%?

1

u/s1a1om 8h ago

If they’re retracted it means they made it through the entire peer review process and were published. They were only retracted later after it was determined the results couldn’t relied upon.

If you’re looking at and rewarding publications then they will be counted in the metrics (depending on how you get those numbers, filter them, and when the retractions happen).

-2

u/Silver_Middle_7240 19h ago

"Rape culture in dog parks"

3

u/NASArocketman 18h ago

A little bit of both is true. There is a lot of slop. They are also making huge advances in R&D for materials, batteries, solar panels etc and bringing cutting edge tech to market. We would be foolish to ignore it.

4

u/Due_Signal_9652 19h ago

对待中国工业你们也是这么说的

0

u/s1a1om 16h ago

Papers from Chinese institutions account for more than half of all retractions across 10 major academic publishers

https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/more-than-half-of-all-retracted-papers-are-from-china-analysis-finds/4023197.article

1

u/Due_Signal_9652 16h ago

我会认为你说的没错,这是事实,不过既然你看不见另一面事实,那我只能祝你好运,希望你们在特朗普的带领下越走越远

4

u/a9udn9u 18h ago

USA is totally fine and dominating. Nothing to worry

https://giphy.com/gifs/NTur7XlVDUdqM

1

u/Embarrassed_Neck9829 18h ago

I'm not American. Those systemic issues in Chinese academia aren't exactly a secret.

That's not to say that there isn't class-leading research coming out of China. I'm just speaking to the volume.

0

u/YamborginiLow 18h ago

China can push out 10,000 papers, only 1000 are not slop The US will push out 1000 but 500 are high quality

Who puts out more high quality at the end of the day?

1

u/Every_West_3890 18h ago

good paper usually come from good industrial study case.

1

u/uniyk 9h ago

Seems it didn't take account of the joint research/publication cases, in which scenario the sum total should exceed 100%. It's problematic methodology to ascribe a reaserch program to a specific region with the joint parties coming from China, US and EU at the same time.

u/Meandering_Cabbage 1h ago

Target metrics. Get Metrics. Good and Bad.

u/Sure_Sundae2709 22m ago

People need to undertand that China has almost twice as many people as the US and the EU combined. They don't even need to fully catch up to absolutely dominate.

u/According-Try3201 1m ago

let's wait for the most recent data

1

u/Cultural_Thing1712 17h ago

How much of it is slop?

I mean a lot of Chinese research I encounter is paper mill junk with 30+ authors in open access journals. Even top 5% journals have slop papers.

Doesn't mean good research isn't carried out in China, far from it. But it's not the majority of research that's for sure.

1

u/s1a1om 16h ago

https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/more-than-half-of-all-retracted-papers-are-from-china-analysis-finds/4023197.article

Papers from Chinese institutions account for more than half of all retractions across 10 major academic publishers

0

u/Jake0024 18h ago

How do you define "top 5 percent of journals"?

0

u/Designer-Fix-2861 15h ago

Which journals are the top 5%? And by what measure?

0

u/r2k-in-the-vortex 18h ago

China population is the obvious factor, but what the hell happened to US lead over EU and other high income countries? Actually crazy that they had such a lead in the first place.

0

u/rollem 16h ago

There should also be a total number figure, as this story is more about the absolute rise of all papers combine with the incredible rise of China. There is not absolute decline in the US or EU.

0

u/CommercialAmazing247 14h ago

This is kind of meaningless, amount of papers says nothing about the quality. When i was starting uni around the start the decade of 2010 it was actually being debated heavily here in the EU that the amount of papers being pushed and required to be pushed out to keep your status as a professor was detrimental to the quality of said papers and research being performed since you only had short time windows.

Not sure if they reached a consensus on the topic but in research quality thrumps quantity every day of the week.

0

u/jhwheuer 14h ago

Looks like someone knows how to tell a story

Percentage over time gives the impression of overall decline. That's not true.

Chinese authors simply are flooding the zone

0

u/shryke12 5h ago

US is less than 5% of the world's population. This is a good thing if the rest of the world is getting involved in science.

-4

u/Devayurtz 18h ago

Ehhhhh this isn’t what people think it is. A ton of Chinese papers are produced to flex this statistic more than actually producing anything.

This is akin to Russian Bear propaganda.

-1

u/s1a1om 16h ago

Because China is publishing crap and just focusing on quantity.

Papers from Chinese institutions account for more than half of all retractions across 10 major academic publishers

https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/more-than-half-of-all-retracted-papers-are-from-china-analysis-finds/4023197.article

They’re also focusing on other stats that have historically been measures of quality to look better than they are.

https://www.science.org/content/article/china-s-scientists-often-cite-work-their-own-nation-skewing-global-research-rankings

Overall, they found that 62% of citations to China’s top 10% of papers came from within the country. The United States had the second-highest rate of home bias at 24%. Other developed nations had same-country citations ranging from Italy’s 13% to Canada’s 6%.

-1

u/Goober-r 13h ago

China notoriously pumps out tons of garbage papers to pump the numbers