• phdepressed
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    There’ll always be someone new to the field who does actually have to read the intro. I read a stuff outside of my field all the time and I rely on the intro to not have to go find a review just to broadly understand a given paper.

    • WalrusDragonOnABike [they/them]@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Can’t say the intro has ever been particularly useful, even if new to the field. If the methods aren’t detailed enough to understand the methods, then you are going to have to look elsewhere. The intro isn’t going to have that information. If you want a general summary of the field, a dedicated review is far far better than most scientists trying to fill space to get to the science.

      • phdepressed
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        When a paper is far enough outside of my field I’m not going to be knowledgeable enough to critique methods. I’m not “new to the field” in the sense that I’m starting research in that area. Just thought the title was interesting/cool and I want to know a little bit more about the specifics. I don’t actually care about the field enough to study it (if I did I’d look for a review). So I’m not trying to understand the field but the just the paper(broadly). Why is the thing they study important? How did they (supposedly) come to their hypothesis? Just how badly is a news report overreaching what the source states? Etc.