245
Powerful (i.imgur.com)
submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml to c/science_memes@mander.xyz

Someone else on mastodon found this https://masto.ai/@stavvers/112655306069874958

EDIT: they might actually be the original author of that? I can't find this indexed anywhere else online (google, google scholar, and google books all turn up nothing or just that mastodon post)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml 17 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Not necessarily. Self citation is different than building on your previous work. You might just seek to use other citations for the relevent concepts

Edit: the 2015 paper this is referencing lists many differing potential reasons for it. Ranging from worrying more about negative feedback for self citation to being more likely to being more critical of their own work

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2378023117738903

[-] MeowZedong@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 6 days ago

Yeah, I feel like a good middle ground is to cite your previous work in the context of "as we previously reported," but maybe that's just based on something that was ingrained in me by academia. It seems tacky. My boss has no problem with it though, he's like, "idgaf, more citations, more views, higher impact."

this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2024
245 points (98.4% liked)

Science Memes

9150 readers
2914 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS