Andy on Twitter

  • Quarter final super rugby and the stadium looks pretty empty. Sad state of super rugby in AU,
  • Agree with Mark - don't get it. Don't need to be reminded that my sandwich was a beauty chook. ,
  • I just published “The Cannes Conundrum” ,
  • Church in London has a little cafe in the entrance serving Allpress coffee. How good is that. God and coffee to go. ,
  • That flight to London is one epic trip. Thanks for an enjoyable flight.,
  • Must read for all marketers... ,
  • ... instead correlate TV to commercial outcomes, not online viewing ,
  • ... but buying TV so people watch you on YouTube while trying to sell Tide... that's more than strange ... ,
  • Another reason TV is so important a part of the Mix - spillover into online engagement ... ,
  • Well that's a change. Might be better to focus on the tech stuff though. And the need for lots of it. ,
  • Some beautiful coffee kit here... ,
  • Further evidence that the IRB are nearly as out of touch with rugby performance as the ARU ,
  • Acquisition is important for growth... But if its is just replacing loss, it isn’t growth – it’s just churn .. ,
  • Connect

the Internet makes us superficial

Definitely plan to write more on this… Nick points to A recent edition of Science featured a worrying paper by University of Chicago sociologist James A. Evans titled Electronic Publication and the Narrowing of Science and Scholarship.

Seeking to learn more about how research is conducted online, Evans scoured a database of 34 million articles from science journals. He discovered a paradox: as journals begin publishing online, making it easier for researchers to find and search their contents, research tends to become more superficial.

Evans summarizes his findings in a new post on the Britannica Blog:

[My study] showed that as more journals and articles came online, the actual number of them cited in research decreased, and those that were cited tended to be of more recent vintage. This proved true for virtually all fields of science … Moreover, the easy online availability of sources has channeled researcher attention from the periphery to the core—to the most high-status journals. In short, searching online is more efficient, and hyperlinks quickly put researchers in touch with prevailing opinion, but they may also accelerate consensus and narrow the range of findings and ideas grappled with by scholars.

If part of the Carr thesis [in “Is Google Making Us Stupid?”] is that we are lazier online, and if efficiency is laziness (more results for less energy expended), then in professional science and scholarship, researchers yearn to be lazy…they want to produce more for less.

Ironically, my research suggests that one of the chief values of print library research is its poor indexing. Poor indexing—indexing by titles and authors, primarily within journals—likely had the unintended consequence of actually helping the integration of science and scholarship. By drawing researchers into a wider array of articles, print browsing and perusal may have facilitated broader comparisons and scholarship.

Speak Up — Add Your Thoughts

Connections

  • Connect
How did you connect?   [?]
Indulgences-Coffee