Sure -- but if we want to trust the quality of the research, 90% of the things I've reviewed for cogsci are pretty sloppy, and the idea that they weigh as much as something that's gone through multiple rounds of revision is questionable
-
-
Ah gotcha! I indeed did not understand that you were concerned by this.
-
Oh, dear. Sorry!
-
Reread your post now. Guess I misread it, because the quote-tweet (or: the ‘fooling yourselves’) seemed to change focus. IMHO so much wrong atm with the academic system that I do not even know where to start in helping aleviate imposter syndrome.
-
Twitter is so hard sometimes. I would love it if proceedings in our field could be treated like journal articles but the way some people use them seems damaging, or at least confusing, to others.
-
At the end of the day if one call the CV section "publications" instead of "journal articles" it's tiny but I think it can help to make younglings less confused... At least it's more descriptive.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
There's nothing I can do but say "that's proceedings" and hope it reaches those who don't come to me, I think. The stereotype threat seems not to be caused by somebody with a couple proceedings in the "journal articles" but with 10s of them.
Thanks. 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.
), so I’m surprised to see this high number (have not been able to attend lately). In any event, I understand those visceral reactions—same.