Hahahahaha 
-
-
Replying to @o_guest
I've seriously been saying this for years, this is a real sticking point for me
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @BayesForDays @o_guest
In my mind cogsci proceedings are papers you couldn't get published elsewhere
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @BayesForDays @o_guest
I don't know about this, a lot of work first published in CogSci proceedings is later published in "prestigious" journals
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @tallinzen @o_guest
If it's published later in a journal then that's one thing. But that doesn't make cogsci proceedings a paper.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BayesForDays @o_guest
Sure, preprints and proceedings papers don't count as much as fancy journal papers for hiring and promotion (for better or worse), but that doesn't mean that the work they describe is work you couldn't get published elsewhere (that's the bit I was objecting to)
2 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @tallinzen @o_guest
Fwiw it's work that often isn't published elsewhere, which I find somewhat suspicious.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @BayesForDays @tallinzen
I think there's definitely a culture amongst certain cogsci attendees that really promotes sending as many abstracts as possible every year and somehow this specific group (dare I say clique?) gets many accepted. It's certainly something.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @BayesForDays
It's not so difficult to get accepted - 73% of the submissions were accepted this year (perhaps one of the reasons a CogSci proceedings paper isn't seen as a big CV win)
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
This shows in the quality of work submitted to/presented at CogSci. In 5 years of reviewing, I’ve come across *maybe* one paper I would recommend reading 6 months after the conference, and I’ve reviewed quite a few papers from “top labs,” which (unsurprisingly) get in.
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like
Yes, my comment wasn't about the general easiness of getting in but the dominance (and I've heard it clearly admitted) of certain names and how certain people try to get as many in as possible. Being able to send 5 abstracts and get 3 accepted is a kind of privilege not afforded
-
-
Replying to @o_guest @aaronsteven and
to most because it takes time to write and do the work even if like some have said the work isn't 100% polished. Just eyeball the names and some names/lab dominate. That's not (only) a function of how easy it is to get in but something more specific.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.