Daniel Lemire's blog

, 4 min read

Do better written papers get more citations?

6 thoughts on “Do better written papers get more citations?”

  1. Mihai says:

    Maybe accepting “impressive-sounding papers” gives the reviewers plausible deniability if the papers turn out to be duds.

  2. @Mihai

    Yes, there might be a status game at play within referees.

    It is certainly easier to recommend something that sounds impressive than something that sounds simple.

  3. KWillets says:

    I’ve been doing a lot of reading of possible citations lately, and it’s interesting how much styles vary even on the same topic. Some authors have the kitchen sink approach, where they define and prove everything, while others simply skip the parts they don’t care about.

    My impression is that less established authors feel the need to include everything, either to increase word count or to fit the requirements of a PhD dissertation.

  4. Doug Hall says:

    As a reviewer, it has been my experience that many submissions wouldn’t pass muster to be released as a report in a corporate department. Our goal is always to minimize the length while maximizing reader comprehension. Sadly, too many technical papers are written to maximize length (right up to the journal’s page count limits) and minimize the number of readers who can understand, let alone replicate, the work documented.

  5. @Doug

    I do not know if business documents are any better… I would guess that it depends on the incentives.

  6. Ashish Sethiya says:

    In my opinion that a research paper should be like that which can truly help someone who often reads your papers rather than using such a vocabulary which is comparatively not easy to understand. As long as there is a question of the citation being cited so in my view if papers contain the essential details explaining all the necessary factors will get cited.