Mediocrity refers to the widespread presence and acceptance of average, unoriginal, or low-impact work within academia — often masked by formalism, jargon, or institutional prestige.

• Repetition of known ideas without meaningful contribution.
• Lack of critical thinking or innovation.
• Excessive jargon used to obscure simplicity or superficiality.
• Conformity to prevailing academic trends without questioning them.
• Dependency on prestige to give weight to otherwise weak content.

• Publish-or-perish culture.
• Metrics-driven evaluation (e.g., h-index, impact factor).
• Careerism and reward for quantity over quality.
• Gatekeeping that favors “safe” contributions over bold or disruptive ones.

A multi-author review full of vague AI enthusiasm, published in a high-impact journal by a prestigious committee, but with no technical depth, data, or practical guidance — this is institutionalized mediocrity.

• Dilution of scientific discourse.
• Wasted funding and academic labor.
• Erosion of public trust in academic authority.
• Hindrance to real progress and innovation.

• Academic Prestige
• Gatekeeping
• Factory-Made Science
• Academic Theater
• Careerism

Bottom line: Mediocrity thrives where form replaces substance, and where prestige shields work from scrutiny.