Each author should be able to articulate what their distinct contribution was.
There is no independent verification of this -- like in all of quant. Lies are the norm.
Don't overvalue single-authored publications
-
Each author should be able to articulate what their distinct contribution was.
There is no independent verification of this -- like in all of quant. Lies are the norm.all quallies lie
That's okay because qual claims/evidence can be independently verified -- hence, if they lie we can readily find out.
-
“My colleagues don’t want to work with me so I’m going to punish you for your popularity.”
Question: What do the single-author trolls have to gain from persuading other scholars from working in diverse, multiple-author teams?
Except no one is saying that. People are just pointing out your joint work will be heavily discounted (as far as evaluation of your scholarship and quality is concerned) unless you have sent a clear signal on your scholarship whether that’s through strong solo work or heavily influential joint work with the same time.Yes. Popularity matters in this business. Like in HS, really.
-
Each author should be able to articulate what their distinct contribution was.
There is no independent verification of this -- like in all of quant. Lies are the norm.
all quallies lieThat's okay because qual claims/evidence can be independently verified -- hence, if they lie we can readily find out.
Nah. Quallies oppose any and all attempts to provide transparency and lower the costs of fraud detection. This makes sense given the rampant fraud among all quals
-
grad students without pubs are just jealous of those with top pubs with their advisors.
Why would anyone be jealous of that? As someone who got a solo top pub during grad school, I've always seen grad students with top pubs with advisors as lacking both creativity and confidence. If you knew you have the creativity to get a solo top pub during grad school, there's zero probability that you would divert time away from solo work to acquire a much weaker signal. I do get mildly annoyed at juniors whose only top publications are with their advisors though. They should voluntarily quit academia and go teach high school
-
grad students without pubs are just jealous of those with top pubs with their advisors.
Why would anyone be jealous of that? As someone who got a solo top pub during grad school, I've always seen grad students with top pubs with advisors as lacking both creativity and confidence. If you knew you have the creativity to get a solo top pub during grad school, there's zero probability that you would divert time away from solo work to acquire a much weaker signal. I do get mildly annoyed at juniors whose only top publications are with their advisors though. They should voluntarily quit academia and go teach high schoolWell the comparison here isn't between you (solo top pub) and those who publish with advisors, but rather between the latter and unpublished folks. I've seen this jealousy dynamic more than once.
And while we all talk about whether we'd rather publish solo or not, quite often grad students lack confidence in their own work and hate to get criticism (cue safe spaces). So they don't pull the trigger but are more than happy to tag along as a coauthor with their advisor.
It's obviously better to publish solo in top outlets but that's rarely the choice ex ante.
-
This can't possibly be a legitimate thread.
It has to be a single unhinged nutter having a faux-debate with himself, repeating the same two inane points 140 times.All the posts by Salome are one person (me). But there must be at least one other person, as I didn't write any of the non-Salome posts.