Something to keep in mind for the EB-1A original contributions criterion? (based on a recent EB-1A AAO decision, link below).
A high citation frequency may simply show that others in your field have noticed your work.
But it is not automatically evidence that your work has impacted or advanced your field in a significant way such that your original contributions can be considered of major significance.
In the decision, the petitioner presented a citation count considered to be high relative to others in their field but did not present sufficient supplementary evidence to show that their contributions had actually impacted or advanced their field in a significant way such that their original contributions could be considered of major significance.
Perhaps the petitioner could have presented more contextual evidence around how their citation rate shows that their work was not just noticed, but also adopted and used by others in their field (as evidence of impact on their field).
Here is a link to the full AAO decision: https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/err/B2%20-%20Aliens%20with%20Extraordinary%20Ability/Decisions_Issued_in_2026/JUL072026_02B2203.pdf
I also recently started a WhatsApp group for those of you who are interested in collaborating with others on publishing articles in industry publications and journals.
The group will be moderated and also only visible to group members.
Want to work with hundreds of other applicants on authorship?
Here is a link to join the group (for paid subscribers):
Comments
Nothing yet. Say the first thing.
Sign in to join the conversation.