• Cornelius_Wangenheim@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    14 hours ago

    Call me a downer if you want, but I think scientific papers should be above using clickbait titles. Scientific papers should be dry, boring and technical so that there’s no doubt that a paper is popular because of its content and not the personality of its writer.

    • CarbonBasedNPU@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      When a scientific paper has one of those titles I assume it is bullshit until proven otherwise. I can not trust a paper that does not even trust itself to stand on its own merits.

    • Aqarius@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 hours ago

      I agree.

      Except for the “this paper will be sad if you don’t read it” one, that one’s on point.

      • Septimaeus@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        I mean, we’re not talking about mutually exclusive properties.

        Whether a paper is more or less dry and whether it’s more or less accessible to newcomers is separate from the quality of the contribution.

        You can have both.