Skip to main content

mastodon - Link to source

The best scientific papers are provocations, not results you can rely on. Discuss!

What I mean is that they should try to force progress by making an outrageous statement that the established field wants to be wrong, but do it so well that proving it wrong is a real challenge.

A corollary: the ultimate way to give respect to a scientific paper is to refuse to believe it, and to be engaged by it enough to write a social media rant, blog or full blown paper explaining why it's so stupid.

#science

#science
in reply to Dan Goodman

El Duvelle
mastodon - Link to source
El Duvelle
• •
If by "not results you can rely on" you mean the "provocative" paper is not based on accurate facts: then that's just misinformation. (Bad)
If by that you mean that it's a theory paper that doesn't create new results but interprets existing results in a new way, supported by accurate facts: then that's a good review that has the potential to reorient a field in a better direction! (Good)
in reply to El Duvelle

Dan Goodman
mastodon - Link to source
Dan Goodman
• •
@elduvelle yes that wasn't very clear. I think the data should be good, collected well, etc. However, most papers don't just say "here's what we did and here's what happened". I'm talking about the extra bit that goes beyond that.
@El Duvelle
⇧