Abstract: The hazards of “publish or perish” have garnered significant attention. However, the impact of publication pressure on the direction of scientific research through researchers’ cognition and behavior remains underexplored. As the primary agents of scientific activities, researchers act as intermediaries in the scientific reward system, facilitating the positive development of scientific research. Both the Merton School and the Paris School argue that the operational logic of science rewards depends on the institutional environment that shapes the behavior of researchers. However, their perspective overlooks the fact that researchers’ reflexive cognition may be altering the trajectory of scientific development from the bottom up. Reflexivity refers to an individual's reflection on past situations, which actively influences the events in which they participate. This is a constructive process where reality impacts cognition, and cognition, in turn, generates new realities. Publication pressure is not merely a product of the environment acting on the individual; it also drives individuals to construct new realities based on their cognition. Therefore, this paper explores the impact of publication pressure on scientific research, emphasizing the reflexive role of researchers in the scientific enterprise and re-examining whether science rewards are oriented towards a responsible and innovative development path. This paper addresses the issue of reflexivity in the science reward system and constructs the reflexive relationship of “science reward and evaluation system - publication pressure - scientific research.” Publication pressure is intensified by the scarcity of resources highlighted through scientific reward mechanisms and the increased publication requirements of a quantitatively oriented research evaluation system. Researchers reflexively choose to deviate from the optimal development of scientific research in terms of research attitudes (diffusion of responsibility in collaborative research), research topic selection (marginalization of repetitive research), and research writing (positivity bias in academic language). The excessive focus on innovation within scientific reward mechanisms overlooks the need for responsible, objective, and reproducible scientific research. Therefore, it is crucial to manage responsibility proactively and promote a shift in publishing practices to encourage pragmatic innovation.

摘要： “要么发表，要么出局”的危害备受学界关注，但鲜有研究解析发表压力如何通过研究人员的认知与行为影响科学研究的走向。作为科学活动主体，研究人员是科学奖励制度促使科学研究良性发展的中介。然而科学奖励制度与评价体系的设计往往忽视了主体的反身性作用。本文基于反身性视域，探究发表压力对科学研究的影响，以期构建“科学奖励与评价制度-发表压力-科学研究”的反身性关系，重新审视科学奖励与评价制度在科学发展中的功能。科学奖励制度凸显的稀缺资源以及量化转向的研究评价体系增加的发表要求均加剧了如今科学研究的发表压力。研究人员则反身性地在研究态度、研究选题以及研究写作方面，倾向于在合作研究过程中表现出责任分散化，对重复性研究的边缘化以及学术语言上的积极偏差。为避免过度创新导向对负责任、客观与可重复性科研要求的忽视，科技政策与评价系统应当前置责任管理，推动出版转向，鼓励求实式创新。