Re:Does Tweeting Improve Citations? One-Year Results from a ...
by mhandley on Sunday June 14, 2020 @08:22PM
(#23522642)
Well, there are gradations to "the wider world". I don't know about you, but I read a lot of stuff that's way outside my area. That's why I hang out here. There's a huge gulf between "suitable for mainstream TV" and the opaque and overly compacted research paper. Places like New Scientist and Ars Technica fill this gap to some extent, but they tend to oversimplify to appeal to a wider audience. I'd rather hear it from the authors in an only slightly dumbed down form.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Does Tweeting Improve Citations? One-Year Results from a ...
by yassine_taw on Monday June 15, 2020 @12:19PM
(#23529073)
Same feeling here. That's why a friend of mine and I created Abstra. We ask authors to come and do some vulgarization themselves. The summaries are structured exactly like most papers: background, findings, and methods. Quick and to the point. There is an incentive for both as the reader gets quality info from the source and the researcher gains audience and exposure. We're at the prototype stage
Check it out abstra.co.uk, would love to have your feedback!
Re:Does Tweeting Improve Citations? One-Year Results from a ...
by jessriedel on Monday June 15, 2020 @10:09AM
(#23527475)
Even as an ambitious and educated outsider, the stuff you're looking at is almost certainly not representative of most research in those respective fields. When weighted by pages, most research is boring and truly only of interest to the few dozen of specialized researchers in that subfield.