this post was submitted on 13 Mar 2024
675 points (99.4% liked)

Science Memes

9989 readers
2160 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.

Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

Sister Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
675
skirting that line (mander.xyz)
submitted 5 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
13 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
top 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 49 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Wait...you mean I was supposed to actually read the articles I cited????

[–] [email protected] 31 points 5 months ago

If YouTube counts 10% as a view, then I can read the discussion by itself and consider myself edumacated.

[–] [email protected] 45 points 5 months ago (1 children)

That's why the good lord gave us abstracts

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago

And explicitly told us to copy/paste stuff until everybody has a copy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feeding_the_multitude

[–] [email protected] 33 points 5 months ago

It’s easy to read articles when you skip the middle parts with all the big words.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Abstracts are good enough for me

[–] [email protected] 17 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Abstract+conclusions is the sweet spot.

This makes me think that given some particular article, the only people that would ever read it in its entirety are its authors and (maybe) a couple reviewers.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 5 months ago (1 children)

My preferred reading order: Abstract > conclusion > results > discussion / analysis > methods > background > introduction

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

This is the way. This is the way of light and goodness.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

My sister cites articles she hasn't even read.

She once tried to tell me that the moon only had 16 shades of color (can't remember the exact number). I told her that couldn't be true because there's an infinite amount of points between each shade since color is a spectrum, so she showed me an article with the headline "the 16 shades of the moon"... We argued for a few minutes and then I read the first paragraph, and it said something like "this guy took 16 photos of the moon's different hues". The article she was basing her claim off of didn't even claim what she thought it did lol.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

Sounds like she was referring to 16 bit

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago

Anyone who fully reads every article they cite is simply bad at time management.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

Real mrn only read titles.