About "moving fast and breaking things" though, since it was basically mentioned as a stance... Let's not? Let's try to be a bit more respectful to our field and colleagues? Let's optimise that? The whole point of doing it right #OpenScience etc., is actually stopping to think.
-
-
This, ignoring vast swathes of relevant research, is the classic thing that perverts the history of a (sub)field and that is what I tried to outline that scares me. Ahistorical takes are BAD.
-
Indeed, As my quoted tweet, what I meant is that sometimes mainstream research in, say, neuroscience or AI, seems fully unaware of classic work in, say, cognitive science and philosophy, and vice versa. >>
-
So I was not talking about citations in individual papers, but about the way the research is pitched, positioned etc. shows unawareness of both known theoretical hiatus and theoretical discoveries in other fields. >>
-
And then there is the bias in citations, where specific people or groups of people are just not cited. That is a whole other problem.
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.