Posing, or refusing to admit the limitations of what you've done is (in my mind) the one great crime in research, that I think should not be tolerated.
But I have no problem with people being naive, speculative, and/or lazy, so long as they admit it.
Conversation
Replying to
very much agreed :) - I hope the fact that I really appreciate you having done this work comes through!
1
1
One more point, neither for or against the case you set out here - you may want to be careful with words like lazy, they tend to be ableist - doing a *full* literature search is hard, disproportionately for some groups (e.g. dyslexics, ASD and ADD)
2
1
and non-native language speakers!! and people without institutional access to journals, or even reliable internet (and probably many more)
1
1
Replying to
Your point is well-taken, and to be honest for these reasons the only person I ever really feel comfortable accusing of laziness is myself
1
1
Replying to
that's very fair - i don't think there's any external offense in what you said - but I question if it's even a fair put-down on yourself*?
ascribing something to laziness is, paradoxically, lazy
*you of course are the final arbiter of this
2
1
Replying to
2
Laziness is good. I like Shalizi and Tozier but I don’t buy their theory in that note at all. I’m in favor of aggressively ignorant rediscovery/reinvention (much more robust guarantor of QA than formal replication). Full lit survey is an especially dumb burden on preprints.
1
6
I have a long rant about this is a Facebook group somewhere. This is one of the reasons I gave up on academia and turned to blogging. It is perversely hostile to rediscovery.
2
5
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more


