When one says something like “most scholars think x” or “the theory of y has not convinced many experts”, how is that actually determined? Are there polls conducted regarding different theories?

  • NetHandle@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Scholarly articles have ‘impact’ measurements. ie. The impact they have on that field. My understanding is that it’s a combination of # of times it’s been cited, # of times its been downloaded/read with a heavier weighting towards citation. You can filter articles by ‘impact’ in many library databases.
    A theory that is not well accepted will be cited less, even if it’s being cited to be debunked the citations still count as impact, however an article with a greater impact will be cited significantly more which suggests the theory is more compelling.

    As far as my understanding goes.

    • TurboTurbo@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You are mixing up the journal impact factor (how many times an article from a journal is cited over the last (generally) two years for a particular scientific journal) and and articles number of citations (the total number an article has been refered to by other articles.

      Journals with a high JIF are generally harder to publish in, but this metric is quite misleading as it depends also on thr size of the field. Ophthalmology journals have overall smaller JIFs than Neurology journals.

      Over the last ~5 years the JIF has fallen out of faver for various reasons (read about them here), but unfortunately it is still being used as a measure of ‘how good your research is’.

      More importantly, (good) scientists don’t base their opinions on single studies, even if they are large. Surely, when there is only a single publication on a topic (e.g., right when the COVID pandemic startedany new researchon this topic received a lot of attention), that may have a large impact on their current beliefs and may spark new research, but more commonly, there are multiple studies on a single topic (e.g., now there are 100s of studies on the effect of COVID on cognitive function, isolation, etc) and a good scientist will try to keep up with all of them to form a conclusive opionin that weighs all these studies. It is common that at some point, a review article will be written up that summarizes the current knowledge from multiple studies (see my other comment).