I'm picking up a good bit of outsider sentiment here. To be clear, this has nothing to do with undergrads, only researchers who literally devote their lives to improving our understanding of the world.
-
I am not questioning the value of scientific research. I am questioning the value of a system that limits access to publicly-funded research to a tiny few, incentivizes positive results + overstated conclusions, & appears to be producing less notable work at an increasing cost
I question the value of a great many terrible journals which exist solely to publish mediocre work, further fields that lack even superficial rigor, & generate citations to boost careers that may or may not even be pointed in the general direction of real questions
-
-
There are indeed some very mediocre things out there. There are also many very good things published and lots of good people who are doing interesting work that makes the world better.
-
Do you think that these people — the ones producing quality work, trying to avoid leaning too far into incentives that work against rigor & who are deeply invested in reducing barriers to entry for their fields — think this is a system that encourages beneficial norms?
- 7 more replies
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.