Ilya Shabanov Profile picture
Jan 6, 2023 9 tweets 4 min read Read on X
Declining Disruption.

#ScienceTwitter is abuzz with this recently published nature article.

I read into the study and 100s of comments.
Consensus: Grants and journals are to blame.

But the authors give a much better, more personal insights.

Here's what I learned:
👇
💡Define Disruption:

Suppose I publish a study S that cites X,Y,Z.

If disruptive:
Subsequent work will cite S primarily, as X,Y,Z are "obsolete".

Consolidating:
S,X,Y and Z will be cited. As all are still relevant.

They validate it using many studies from 20th century.
Reason 1: Decline in Diversity

We become "super nerds".
It makes our steps safer, but smaller.

Read "The Age of Insight" to learn how artists, psychologists and doctors all mingled in salons more than a century ago.

Maybe it's time to rediscover the connection to the arts?
Reason 2: Self Citation

We all have a self-confirmation bias.

Evidence against our point of view, tends to be disregarded.

It is hard to challenge oneself, especially as you get older. (ask your parents...)

But can it not even be liberating to make mistakes and pivot?
Reason 3: Information overload

Information overload is here to stay.

Luckily, AI might help wit this. It's becoming incredibly good at summarising already.

Managing your information wisely with tools and methods is another way to increase your capacity.
Reason 4: Personal benefits

Publish or Perish.
A high citation index opens doors but also servers our vanity.

Ask yourself a fundamental question:

Why do you do research?
🌈 Positive outlook:

The authors argue that despite the decline in disruptiveness, we are still not at the end of it.

The exciting scientific journey will continue.
Summary

► Nurture creativity by learning outside your area of expertise

► Find ways to manage/filter information overload

► Keep your vanity & bias in check

Don't get me wrong - we should question our system.

But equally important: We ought to question ourselves.
⬛️The case of Peer Review & Grants is more complicated:

• Peer review became a requirement in ~1970s (e.g. '73 for nature).

• The first NSF grant was awarded in 1952.

If we look at the graph: Decline was way under way then.

Ideas?

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Ilya Shabanov

Ilya Shabanov Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Artifexx

Jun 19
Almost done with the slides for this upcoming webinar.

It will be aimed at note-taking and synthesis.

Here is a sneak peak:
👇 Image
Note Taking

Most people take notes in the order they learn about the content.

This is wrong.

Conceptual notes are much more powerful.

Because you don't repeat yourself and use links instead.Image
Academic Note-taking

For academia, special rules apply.

You must protect yourself from plagiarism and always know where you learned what.

This is why you must use a source note template.Image
Image
Read 8 tweets
Jun 18
Everybody uses Google Docs.

But most don't install any of the 100+ extensions.

Unlock hidden features and save time with these 4 must-use extensions: 👇
(I use them for scientific papers)
What are extensions?

Extensions add functionality that Google Docs does not have.

Each extension adds a sidebar where it can be configured and activated.

Google does not develop these extensions but they gain access to your content.

Be aware of privacy issues.
1. Cross Reference

Allows you to generate numbers for figures automatically.

If you rearrange the figures, just click a button and all names and mentions are updated.

Works equally well for tables or equations.

Irreplaceable for academic work.
Read 8 tweets
Jun 12
I thought I would spend days on this lit review.

It took me just 10 minutes (no joke)!

Here is how and what tool I used:
👇Image
My Topic:

I am figuring out how forests react to climate change in New Zealand.

The big question: Who has done it before?
(A vast literature review question that can take hours)

Googling it, I found only a single paper: [Wardle 1992]
Really!?Image
To check if there is really only one paper, I searched for this paper [Wardle 1992] on @LitmapsApp ... Image
Read 11 tweets
Jun 10
Struggling with the discussion section?

Here is an unconventional strategy:

1. Lay out findings from papers on a canvas
2. Link each one to the PDF
3. Group by Topic
4. Summarize what you see as text
5. Flesh out and polish

Let's look at the details:
👇
For this, I am using the @obsdmd Canvas feature. If you are unfamiliar, check out this thread:

1. Lay out the findings of others

Copy quotes from related papers and link to the paper.

(yellow links lead to PDFs, blue links to my note on the paper)

Link them together, here for example are two estimates of a number that are quite far apart - discussion material!Image
Read 10 tweets
Jun 7
Lost in your research?

Create a research map - it's easy.

Here's how to start and find that research gap:
👇Image
1. Use @drawio

A free tool for building research maps.

Drag boxes from the left sidebar.

Customize it with the buttons on the right sidebar.
2. Define what each box means

Each box is an actor that can interact/be connected to others.

Here are some ideas for functional ecologists:Image
Read 10 tweets
Jun 3
Every academic wants to find meaningful research gaps.

❌ Old way: Read 1000s of papers
✅ New way: A step-by-step, visual strategy

Here's my workflow using Obsidian, Litmaps, Consensus and DrawIO:
(and a webinar on how to do this!)
👇 Image
1. Start with finding research questions

Sometimes there are papers dedicated to identifying them.
This will make your literature review process ENJOYABLE, as you won't follow ideas that are irrelevant (but inspire you personally).

Here are two examples:
Image
Image
2. Next find key papers on this topic.

One of the fastest and easiest ways to get started, is to use @ConsensusNLP GPT.

Find it in the GPT store or just use their website.

Here I just copy and pasted question 8 from the previous image.

The first hit seems reasonable! Image
Read 13 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(