• 2 months - 28 posts - Latest - RSS
• OP: 11 Goods vs 0 No Goods
• Thread: 110 Goods vs 44 No Goods

1. Ysabel
   

   so much of this is being a cool kid in hs again. really. if you're one of the cool kids people cite you. if you're not they don't and its really arbitrary who is "in".
   Except the fact that 95% of people in political science were never the cool kids.

   i didn't say that. i just said that social dynamics similar to what occur in high schools occur in our field too. there are absolutely cliques of the "cool kids" among the younger generation of scholars in each subfield and they do get cited more. they're not necessarily people who were "cool" at 16.

   You can’t escape primate politics. They’re no different in academia than anywhere else.

   2 months ago # QUOTE 0 YEA 0 NAY!

2. Summer
   

   Even my blog post have loads of cites - not sure what I’m doing right. Just being myself is a good strategy I guess

   2 months ago # QUOTE 2 YEA 2 NAY!

3. Chyna
   

   I'm tenured at a LAC. I publish regularly, go to 2-3 conferences a year, recommend my own articles when I review, publicize on Twitter when a new article comes out, and a couple of times I've paid for open access. My h-index is 3. R1 people cite each other because they think it helps them for tenure / promotion, and grad students cite R1 people because they hope R1 people will notice them. The rest of us are SOL.

   2 months ago # QUOTE 5 YEA 2 NAY!

4. Madeline
   

   My h-index is 3. R1 people cite each other because they think it helps them for tenure / promotion, and grad students cite R1 people because they hope R1 people will notice them. The rest of us are SOL.

   siiiiiiiiiinggggggggg the s0000000000000nnnnnnnnnnnnggggggggggggggggggg of mmmmmmmmmyyyyyyyy peeeeeeeeeeo0oooopleeeeeeeeeee,

   the l00000000000000000cccccccccccccittttttteeeeeeeee, f4hgh0000000000000007777777ss!

   2 months ago # QUOTE 2 YEA 2 NAY!

5. Gerald
   

   Our discipline is defined by fads, not by the quality of the research. You should do your best to align your research interests with one of those fads. The great thing about fads is, even if your work is garbage, it will still get tons of cites.

   Also, have you considered putting together a twitter thread on your most recent publication? Research quality is directly proportional to your ability to string together a dozen or so vague tweets that falsely convey the groundbreaking nature of your work while totally ignoring the limitations and weaknesses.

   Finally... humblebrag! Pretend that you're surprised and humbled to have your work appear in Journal of Important Stuff. Thank the people who inspired you (but only if they have twitter handles). You're not looking for citations. You're just trying to make the world a better place.

   2 months ago # QUOTE 5 YEA 1 NAY!

6. Madeline
   

   Our discipline is defined by fads, not by the quality of the research. You should do your best to align your research interests with one of those fads. The great thing about fads is, even if your work is garbage, it will still get tons of cites.

   "since myyyyyyy wooooooooorrrrrrkkkkkkkkkk is not ccccccccccciiiitttttttedd, itttttt'sssssssss actuallyyyyyyyyyyyy hiiiiiiiiiiiiiighhhhhhhh quuuuuuuaaaaaaaaaaallllliiiiiiiiiiittttttyyyy!"

   2 months ago # QUOTE 2 YEA 2 NAY!

7. Acacia
   

   Our discipline is defined by fads, not by the quality of the research. You should do your best to align your research interests with one of those fads. The great thing about fads is, even if your work is garbage, it will still get tons of cites.

   "since myyyyyyy wooooooooorrrrrrkkkkkkkkkk is not ccccccccccciiiitttttttedd, itttttt'sssssssss actuallyyyyyyyyyyyy hiiiiiiiiiiiiiighhhhhhhh quuuuuuuaaaaaaaaaaallllliiiiiiiiiiittttttyyyy!"

   Quality? Lolz. Some of my most slapdash papers are highly cited. Meanwhile, the carefully researched projects that are years in the making get few cites. Quality has nothing to do with it. Gerald is correct.

   2 months ago # QUOTE 3 YEA 1 NAY!

8. Alexandrea
   

   Our discipline is defined by fads, not by the quality of the research. You should do your best to align your research interests with one of those fads. The great thing about fads is, even if your work is garbage, it will still get tons of cites.

   "i ttttttttttttttoooooooooooooooooiiiiiiiiiiiillllllllllll in obbbbbbbbbbbbbsccccccccccccccccuuuuuurrrrrriiiiiiiiiitttty,
   my geniuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuussssssss recognized by noooooooooooooooooooone!"

   2 months ago # QUOTE 3 YEA 2 NAY!

Reply

Post

Markup: a blockquote code em strong ul ol li.