11 ms·
For journal papers I get you completely dude. I am a PhD, and now a research scientist. Reading and writing journal papers is what I have been doing for close t
by N1H1L 5y ago
For journal papers I get you completely dude. I am a PhD, and now a research scientist. Reading and writing journal papers is what I have been doing for close to a decade now - and yet to really get a paper - I often have to dedicate two-three days to that paper.
Many people in my field say that they have read a paper, but from my experience all they have done is read the abstract and the figure captions. That's not reading a paper.
Think of it this way - the work in the paper often took several months, and then a few more months to write, revise and polish it. It literally condenses one to two man-years worth of acquired knowledge in 10 pages - it should not shame you then that it takes a few days for you to digest it all.
- wolverine876 5y ago> the work in the paper often took several months, and then a few more months to write, revise and polish it. It literally condenses one to two man-years worth of acquired knowledge in 10 pages - it should not shame you then that it takes a few days for you to digest it all. Essential point, but in the interest of practicality: is there a way such knowledge could be communicated more efficietly?
- shivajikobardan 5y agoI think they could be translated to slides and videos, but researchers don't have time to do that...
- N1H1L 5y ago> Essential point, but in the interest of practicality: is there a way such knowledge could be communicated more efficiently? Papers could be restructured better in my opinion. Journal papers are still written as if they are for a print magazine - hyper tight and page constrained. Print scientific journals are basically dead, so why write them like that? The supplemental information should be a part of the main paper.