Ray Bowen, assistant director for engineering at the National Science Foundation said that this “does suggest that a lot of work is generally without utility in the short-term sense.” Frank Press, the president of the National Academy of Sciences, noted that “there are obvious concerns which are worrisome—namely that the work is redundant, it’s me-too type of follow-on papers, or the journals are printing too much.” To J. Duderstadt, University of Michigan President, the growing number of journals and the high number of uncited articles simply confirm a suspicion that academic culture encourages spurious publication. “It is pretty strong evidence of how fragmented scientific work has become, and the kinds of pressures which drive people to stress number of publications rather than quality of publications.” “The obvious interpretation is that the publish-or-perish syndrome is still operating in force,” said David Helfand the chairman of the astronomy department at Columbia University, while the editor of the Journal of the American Chemical Society Allen Bard concluded that “in many ways, publication no longer represents a way of communicating with your scientific peers, but a way to enhance your status and accumulate points for promotion and grants”.