5 Answers

  1. I looked up the citations of her work in Google Scholar (for “tatiana chernigovskaya” and “tatiana chernigovskaya”) and according to my estimates, her h-index is approximately 20, which is about the level of the average psychology professor, i.e.e. In general, her work is recognized by the scientific community, but does not carry any such revelation, which would be a reason for heated discussions and active controversy. I have not seen any scientific work devoted to criticism of Chernihiv's work, and, as a rule, this is evidence in favor of the fact that the scientist is comfortable in the paradigm and does not present anything strongly contradictory to it to the public.

  2. Open the Web of Science (available through the university library). We write in the search for author window – Chernigovskaya T. As of September 19, 2018, the total number of citations was 105 with 26 publications. If she was about 30 years old, then you could say that she was an aspiring scientist. Given that she is over 70 years old and students and postgraduates work for her, we can safely say that the scientist did not work out. From the word absolutely. I do not evaluate Russian articles, as they do not pass through independent strict peer review, and besides, serious scientists (both Russian and foreign) do not read them. Think about where so many titles come from =)

  3. Hello,I'm wondering how you can evaluate only by the h-index, in a year, for example, with its current popularity.it will most likely be high.And what, then, in such a short time, she will become a super-scientist?

  4. I'm a speech therapist. And in our environment, among neuropsychologists, articles and quotations by T. Chernigovskaya began to appear. Besides, I am also interested in the structure of the brain, consciousness, etc. I began to listen to lectures. And I realized it was the same thing. And besides, apparently, to attract attention, it operates with unproven, in my opinion, facts. For example, that the brain controls us completely. He gives an example of what we first react with an action or do, then realize. But I think it's just that our awareness of the action is delayed and that's all. So this is what she made her chip and tours, earns money. So, I doubted the scientific nature of her lectures, began to search and found a couple of articles, including this chat. So I guess I didn't doubt it for nothing.

  5. Its citation index, the Hirsch index, is 7. You can end there. That is, as a researcher, she is nothing of herself.

    Go to Scopus or Mendeley, enter the name Chernigovskaya, here is her profile with all possible variants of the first and last name – https://www.scopus.com/authid/detail.uri?authorId=6603435351, Web of Science (Publons) – https://publons.com/researcher/2588354/tatiana-v-chernigovskaya/.

    As of May 2020, its H-index (H-index), the citation index is 7 with 57 papers and 206 citations in Scopus, 23 and 142 in Poblons. And this is taking into account the fact that she published her first work in 1974, and she is 70 years old. This is very small. For example, Konstantin Severinov, a Rutgers professor who graduated from the Biology Department of Moscow State University in 1984, has an X-index of 56, and her senior researcher, enodocrinologist Clifford Rosen, has an H-index of 100, almost a Nobel level, and 39,000 citations. Well, that's something like that. And now look in Google, how many interviews were distributed by Professor Rosen, and how much PR in the media Chernihiv..))



    Researcher and popularizer of science Evgeny Kunin has an H-index of 160, but this is even higher than that of many Nobel laureates, since the person is constantly working and publishing.�


    Russian physicist Vladimir Petrov from the Institute of Physics and Technology in Protvino (Dubna University) has an H-index of 119. And after all, even a permanent job in Russia did not prevent a person from reaching such a level, although he works a lot in Europe and the USA, is published in the best magazines, and is an award winner.� Scopus/Elsevier.�


    Again, she has no publications in international peer-reviewed journals with a high impact factor. There are joint publications in foreign journals with her graduate students, as well as publications in translated journals such as Neuroscience and behavioral physiology, which publishes RAS in English. In fact, this is a translation of the journal Rossiiskii Fiziologicheskii Zhurnal imeni I. M. Sechenova – https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11055-009-9193-8

    That is, we can conclude that Chernihiv is not a well-known and cool researcher in the field of biology and its branches, she is not published in cool journals, and she is not a specialist in neuroscience . There is a lot of noise, but in fact just a bloated and hyped personality. No more than that.�

    And, of course, she is not a world-renowned scientist.�

    Also interesting are her statements about the citation index and the so-called “scientific schools”:) .. – https://spbvedomosti.ru/news/obshchestvo/menee_strashno_chem_nbsp_ozhidali/

    Auntie wants to continue sawing “scientific” budgets and other gadgets without doing anything (it is inefficient to use state funds), while the rest are really engaged in science. Well, in general, there were and still are many such people in Russia and the former USSR. Real scientists don't have time to give interviews, and it doesn't make much sense. They disappear in laboratories. Anyone who is engaged in science knows that it is necessary to plow there. In science, it is impossible to be second, you must always be first.�

    In general, there are a lot of people in the country in all spheres who pretend to be smart, make all sorts of statements on various topics in which they do not understand anything at all. Although in reality they are not experts in anything.

    Now pay attention to the number of awards, titles and regalia..)) � �

    Report finished!..))

Leave a Reply