4 ms·
> Also, using "we" is standard scientific practice, not some bluff. No. The standard practice is to use passive forms. EDIT: I've been informed by the people
by AllegedAlec 6y ago
> Also, using "we" is standard scientific practice, not some bluff.
No. The standard practice is to use passive forms.
EDIT: I've been informed by the people responding that passive form is now considered archaic, so apparently using first pronouns is now acceptable. This must've changed since I did my research.
- timerol 6y agoThe journal Nature respectfully disagrees: https://www.nature.com/nature-research/for-authors/write https://www.nature.com/nature-research/for-authors/write > Nature journals prefer authors to write in the active voice ("we performed the experiment...") as experience has shown that readers find concepts and results to be conveyed more clearly if written directly.
- dekhn 6y agoThis is.. a bit historical. While the passive voice was recommended in the past, most journals and advisors recommend using active voice in papers now.
- AllegedAlec 6y agoThanks for the update. Back when I did my studies (less than a decade ago) I was told, and all papers were also written, passively.
- tzs 6y agoI took a look at a few random recent papers at arxiv.org, in physics, biology, math, and economics. They all used "we". Wikipedia says it is discourage in the social sciences, though, because "it fails to distinguish between sole authorship and co-authorship" [1]. I'm curious now why it is so important to distinguish between sole authorship and co-authorship via writing style. If you are reading the paper itself, a glance at the author list will tell you that. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nosism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nosism