Nature News examines how researchers are increasingly taking to "Twitter and … other social media within hours rather than years" to tear papers apart. Duke University's David Goldstein tells Nature that he views this as a good thing, as "when some of these things [contested papers] sit around in the scientific literature for a long time, they can do damage: they can influence what people work on, they can influence whole fields," though he adds that "there can be a herd mentality to this, which one wants to be really careful of." Kevin Bonham at We, Beasties says that, like many physicists and mathematicians do, he "would love to show my work on this blog before it's actually done, but that would never fly with my boss." Even if his work passes the peer-review stage, Bonham still couldn't publish his results online to spark a discussion "because then the work is owned by the publisher," he adds. Now that researchers have harnessed social media to discuss research results, he says that "I at least feel privileged to be part of the new media landscape. With our powers combined, maybe we can have a positive impact."
@Nature Examines #pitilesstweets on Papers
Jan 22, 2011