Nothing, NOTHING, in research raises my blood pressure like the "teach the controversy" approach to theory and citations.https://twitter.com/juliagalef/status/1045039424038350848 …
-
Show this thread
-
Researcher A: here is my theory *becomes famous* Researcher B: theory A is totally utterly incandescently dog-botheringly wrong *demonstrates using facts and whatnot* Researcher C: "some controversy exists over theory A **cite cite** but I shall now treat it as the word of God."
5 replies 11 retweets 46 likesShow this thread
Replying to @jamesheathers
Josh Nicholson Retweeted scite
Most don't even cite it! https://www.bmj.com/content/339/bmj.b2680 … Hopefully we can help highlight critical studies and make it harder for authors to brush aside/ignore:https://twitter.com/sciteai/status/1055927904717160449 …
Josh Nicholson added,
scite @sciteai
A short thread on the value of http://scite.ai :
This study in Biological Psychiatry from 2006 has been cited 332 times. The journal is "one of the most selective and highly cited journals in the field of psychiatric neuroscience....
https://www.biologicalpsychiatryjournal.com/article/S0006-3223(05)01001-2/fulltext … pic.twitter.com/zwpWYbhYKt
Show this thread
5:43 AM - 27 Oct 2018
0 replies
0 retweets
2 likes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.