Someone (Uzzi et al. SCIENCE vol. 342 no. 6187 October 25, 2013 page 468, all right I didn’t read the paper.  I just looked at the blurb.  Didn’t realize the paper was in the same issue.) has made and effort to detect what kind of papers are likely to have a big impact, generally defined as how often the paper gets referred to by later researchers.  It turns out that the strong papers were not the novel ones but ones that combined novel results with otherwise conventional thinking.

In other words if you have a new way of confirming what they already know they’ll love you.  Most papers were highly conventional.

So it doesn’t look all that good for somebody whose results are novel in the extreme and who draws upon existing knowledge interpreted in a novel way. 

Get in their faces and they’ll hate you.

Oh well.  It’s really just the story of my life.

There have been 61 visitors so far.

Home page.