3 ms·
I don't know why the downvotes. Publishing something takes a lot of directed effort. It's so tough to stop doing (what feels like) the real work, and quickly sq
by anjc 8y ago
I don't know why the downvotes. Publishing something takes a lot of directed effort. It's so tough to stop doing (what feels like) the real work, and quickly squeeze out a submission for a conference that has a 10% acceptance rate. Of course publishing is extremely important, but too large a focus on publishing hampers results.
- Fomite 8y agoResults that aren't disseminated are functionally useless.
- taejo 8y agoSure, results need to be published. The problem is that the cart is put before the horse: we decide to publish the results, and where to publish, before we have an inkling of what the results will be.
- Fomite 8y agoI'm not necessarily sure this is the cart before the horse. Deciding to publish the results can just as easily be restated as "Come up with an experiment with a clear and precise scope" Where to publish is often determining what audience and what questions to ask. For example, targeting a clinical journal means proofs and analytical results may be less compelling, while a simulation of a study might be of active interest. Both of those help narrow the scope of "All possible interesting questions" to something tractable.