3 ms·
Most scientists don't publish books. They do research and publish papers.
by aswanson 17y ago
Most scientists don't publish books. They do research and publish papers.
- Alex3917 17y ago"Most scientists don't publish books. They do research and publish papers." But this is because they no longer get "credit" for writing books, which is exactly the point the article was making. Scientists used to write books all the time.
- aswanson 17y agoI would venture that doing original research should be given more weight than writing books. Books contained calcified knowledge that can be disseminated by someone familiar with the field; a non-scientist as it were. This is the point of publications of popular science. Original research that leads to new insights into a field are more difficult to obtain, require a higher level of skill and ability and therefore should be more important to a scientific reputation.
- Alex3917 17y agoBooks used to contain original research and theories. (Think Stanley Milgram's book Obedience.) It's only in the last 30 years that science books tend to just be collections of other people's papers rewritten for the lay audience. Because modern academia rewards people for churning out large amounts of derivative work but not for spending time coming up with groundbreaking theories, pretty much the only time scientists write books is when they get 600k advances (like Gilbert).
- yummyfajitas 17y agoIt has little to do with credit. Writing a book/survey paper can get you great recognition if you finish it and do a good job. The reason scientists write papers is because science is fun, but writing is boring (compare: coding vs documentation). Research papers represent the bare minimum level of documentation you can get away with but still keep your job.