How would you describe a paper with over 2000 reads, over 30 recommendations and zero citations????
When the paper gets 30 recommendations by scholars, I think it's considered a very good paper
Best Regards Mirna Leko-Šimić
I really don't know Mirna. Citations are very rare in some subject areas. 2000 reads suggests an interesting title. 30 recommendations is only 1.5% of reads, which is not overly impressive. So, interesting title, some important content, but nothing ground breaking. How's that?
Christopher NOCK
Authors possibly generous with their time and energy. Or authors able to give the article an interesting or unusual title that attracted a lot of readers.
interesting. It's normal. If you read a paper and find it is interesting, then that's enough.
More citations = an interest of a group (but it could be a narrow topic); and/or the authors are serving a committee; good paper; first paper; negatives; etc.
More recommendations = easy to access and understand to a large audience.
More reads = good title, good topic to a large audience (but possibly it's not a focused topic of a community; or is unaware yet by the community); not all people who like a paper / idea / comment will click 'Like' or 'Recommend'.
Below are some scenarios for a discussion.
[scenario in question]
2000 reads, over 30 recommendations and 0 citations
[other scenarios]
2000 reads, over 0 recommendations and 30 citations
30 reads, over 0 recommendations and 2000 citations
0 reads, over 30 recommendations and 2000 citations
[less likely, but still possible]
30 reads, over 2000 recommendations and 0 citations
0 reads, over 2000 recommendations and 30 citations
When the paper gets 30 recommendations by scholars, I think it's considered a very good paper
Best Regards Mirna Leko-Šimić
Mirna Leko-Šimić Do you have such an example? Which field is it? Citations nowadays is not so important, especially in some fields.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Papers