3 ms·
The word used was "successful", not "good". Reproduction papers and meta-analyses seldom generate notoriety.
by Karunamon 6y ago
The word used was "successful", not "good". Reproduction papers and meta-analyses seldom generate notoriety.
- ozim 6y agoWatch out for the words. Being notorious :), or lets just call it being well known is not a measure of success. Problem with defining successful scientist is I suppose more complex than scientist becoming a celebrity. I believe one can be very successful by reproducing papers and for example pointing out bad ones that claim something that was supposed to be "groundbreaking".