Interlude: Impact, Tortured Acronyms, and Formalized Curiosity

Hi Crystal,

Earlier this week, I had a conversation with one of my students about the difference between significance, relevance, and impact in research. Although significance and relevance might seem relatively straightforward, impact is less clear.

Significance is the importance of the research. Does (or will) the project address an important problem or crucial barrier to progress in the field?

Relevance is the state of being appropriate or suitable for a particular purpose. How is (or will) the project benefit or advance science or society?

Impact is the combination of significance and relevance. It is the likelihood that the project has (or will have) a powerful influence on the field. How does (or will) the project move the field forward?

These three elements are key features of a persuasive argument that will win over your reviewers and readers.

Now onto this week's round-up...

💌 Round-up

💻 From My Desk

Inclusive Language Course​
I was thrilled to get a couple of great reviews on my (free) inclusive language course this week. Here's what two recent students had to say:

"Fantastic, informative course"

"This was a concise, clearly presented overview of current best practices on using inclusive language. It provides links to some additional resources as well. It’s a great reminder to be compassionate and mindful of how you describe the people you are reporting on."

If you haven't already taken the course, I encourage you to check it out.

👓 Reading

Plagiarism in peer-review reports could be the ‘tip of the iceberg’​
”The team published the results of its investigation in Scientometrics in February, examining dozens of cases of apparent plagiarism in peer-review reports, identifying the use of identical phrases across reports prepared for 19 journals. The team discovered exact quotes duplicated across 50 publications, saying that the findings are just 'the tip of the iceberg' when it comes to misconduct in the peer-review system.”

​Software that detects ‘tortured acronyms’ in research papers could help root out misconduct​
”The group behind the acronym detection…previously developed a range of automatic misconduct detectors on the publicly available Problematic Paper Screener (PPS). The system automatically scans the scientific literature weekly and flags papers that have tortured phrases—nonsensical paraphrases such as “glucose bigotry” instead of “glucose intolerance”—cell lines that do not exist, and other giveaways that signal potentially grave problems.

Now, the group has added tortured acronyms to its list of red flags and is offering free software for publishers to screen for previously unidentified tortured acronyms in paper submissions…"

💬 Quote

"Research is formalized curiosity. It is poking and prying with a purpose." – Zora Neale Hurston

💭 Thoughts

Learning to write well is like learning to drive a car.

At first, you really need to pay attention to how you are controlling the vehicle or the writing.

With practice, the skills become more natural and instinctive.

Thank you so much for reading.

Warmly,

Crystal