It's interesting how the use of an AI tool to help read academic papers raises the question of what academic papers are even for. Even before the use of AI, students were taught to not read the paper from beginning to end. But then, what are they reading it for? As Tony Hirst documents, dome people are just looking for more references, others are looking for answers to questions, while still others are looking for new questions. I read academic papers critically and within the broader context of the literature generally (hence I spend time in the literature reviews, often the most valuable part of the paper). Because of the lack of accepted methodology or common research questions in our discipline, the contribution of research data is negligible (though I still read the conclusions to find out what the authors believed before going through the charade of proving it with data). P.S. totally agreed with Hirst on the two-column format.
Today: 0 Total: 103 [Direct link] [Share]
