That’s why the good lord gave us abstracts
skirting that line
Submitted 10 months ago by fossilesque@mander.xyz to science_memes@mander.xyz
https://mander.xyz/pictrs/image/f60949bc-9b09-43f3-99bc-26433507353e.jpeg
Comments
Drinvictus@discuss.tchncs.de 10 months ago
Bristle1744@lemmy.today 10 months ago
And explicitly told us to copy/paste stuff until everybody has a copy en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feeding_the_multitude
Nobody@lemmy.world 10 months ago
It’s easy to read articles when you skip the middle parts with all the big words.
tacotroubles@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Abstracts are good enough for me
Engywuck@lemm.ee 10 months ago
Abstract+conclusions is the sweet spot.
This makes me think that the only people that read a whole article are only its authors and (maybe) a couple reviewewrs.
howrar@lemmy.ca 10 months ago
My preferred reading order: Abstract > conclusion > results > discussion / analysis > methods > background > introduction
THE_ANTIHERO@lemmy.today 10 months ago
Huh then i am the baddest boy alive .
A_Very_Big_Fan@lemmy.world 10 months ago
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.
fossilesque@mander.xyz 10 months ago
Sounds like she was referring to 16 bit
Yeller_king@reddthat.com 10 months ago
Anyone who fully reads every article they cite is simply bad at time management.
alp@lemmy.zip 10 months ago
Real mrn only read titles.
littlebluespark@lemmy.world 10 months ago
You monster!
dingus@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Wait…you mean I was supposed to actually read the articles in citing???
DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 10 months ago
If YouTube counts 10% as a view, then I can read the discussion by itself and consider myself edumacated.