But it is what we have at hand and I fear we are misusing it. Perhaps we should try to minimise using it as a competition scenario and fruitless winning/loose dynamics.
-
-
Replying to @twitemp1 @dan_marinazzo and
My biggest sadness isn't that Twitter interactions suck often it's that the literature, like I said, genuinely is getting pretty messed up.
1 reply 1 retweet 8 likes -
Every group or subfield has to rediscover and relabel what others have done because of some combination of ignorance and credit assignment drive.
2 replies 2 retweets 8 likes -
Iris van Rooij Retweeted Iris van Rooij
Iris van Rooij added,
Iris van Rooij @IrisVanRooijReplying to @kimberlyquinn @JenniRoddOften observe whole subfields forget what was already known long ago & take a decades to ‘rediscover’. This particular pertains to known fundamental theoretical problems and hiates. It seems more attractive to think we are making progress while we are just lost without knowing.3 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @IrisVanRooij @ProfData and
I am so frustrated by this sort of thing. I don't know if this simply a fundamental human limitation we should accept or a brokenness of science that everyone has accepted as the norm.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @NeuroStats @IrisVanRooij and
It is hardly a bad thing that so many quantitative researchers in applied sciences re-discovered PCA or some variation for themselves. True/useful things will always be re-discovered over and over.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @NeuroStats @IrisVanRooij and
On the other hand, I find it unforgivable in the age of google scholar, that someone didn't bother to use better search terms to cite relevant competing literature. Almost guaranteed that you can publish a "new" method in a place like Nat. Comm. without citing relevant sub-field.
3 replies 1 retweet 5 likes -
Replying to @NeuroStats @IrisVanRooij and
Research in some areas, particularly those that are no longer fashionable is very often ignored by those who, being aware of it, have an interest to do so; as a consequence, young generations reinvent the wheel.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @twitemp1 @NeuroStats and
I doubt they can't do Google Scholar. I think it's something more systemic.
3 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
You mean that literature citation is driven by factors unrelated to "I want to cite all other relevant/related work"?
2 replies 0 retweets 3 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.