Comments on: Does quoting scholarly journals make something less authoritative? http://www.nirak.net/2007/12/23/does-quoting-scholarly-journals-make-something-less-authoritative/ Karin Dalziel Thu, 21 Aug 2008 20:35:04 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: karin http://www.nirak.net/2007/12/23/does-quoting-scholarly-journals-make-something-less-authoritative/#comment-18657 karin Tue, 08 Jan 2008 22:07:44 +0000 http://www.nirak.net/2007/12/23/does-quoting-scholarly-journals-make-something-less-authoritative/#comment-18657 Commenter above: I agree with you. Most nutrition and diet book I read can be summed up thusly: 1. Eat more fruits and veggies and whole grains 2. Eat treats sparingly. 3. Don't gorge yourself. 4. For god's sake, get some exercise! Commenter above: I agree with you. Most nutrition and diet book I read can be summed up thusly:

1. Eat more fruits and veggies and whole grains
2. Eat treats sparingly.
3. Don’t gorge yourself.
4. For god’s sake, get some exercise!

]]> By: quack-quack http://www.nirak.net/2007/12/23/does-quoting-scholarly-journals-make-something-less-authoritative/#comment-18654 quack-quack Tue, 08 Jan 2008 21:35:30 +0000 http://www.nirak.net/2007/12/23/does-quoting-scholarly-journals-make-something-less-authoritative/#comment-18654 As someone with a background in health and nutrition, I have no earthly idea why anyone would even pick up this book when there are so many reputable sources out there. The book is just another example of someone trying to cash in on people's laziness and unwillingness to realize there are no short-cuts to weight loss. Therapeutic diets are based on quack-science. As someone with a background in health and nutrition, I have no earthly idea why anyone would even pick up this book when there are so many reputable sources out there. The book is just another example of someone trying to cash in on people’s laziness and unwillingness to realize there are no short-cuts to weight loss. Therapeutic diets are based on quack-science.

]]> By: Connie http://www.nirak.net/2007/12/23/does-quoting-scholarly-journals-make-something-less-authoritative/#comment-17431 Connie Wed, 26 Dec 2007 18:43:59 +0000 http://www.nirak.net/2007/12/23/does-quoting-scholarly-journals-make-something-less-authoritative/#comment-17431 On an unrelated note, I found this post on a good blog and thought of you, http://edgeofthewest.wordpress.com/2007/12/24/burning-books/ On an unrelated note, I found this post on a good blog and thought of you,

http://edgeofthewest.wordpress.com/2007/12/24/burning-books/

]]> By: karin http://www.nirak.net/2007/12/23/does-quoting-scholarly-journals-make-something-less-authoritative/#comment-17112 karin Mon, 24 Dec 2007 17:10:14 +0000 http://www.nirak.net/2007/12/23/does-quoting-scholarly-journals-make-something-less-authoritative/#comment-17112 Mark, I totally agree that we need "an educated citizenry that is not only not put off by a footnote but actively wants them so they can check sources" as you say. I wonder what needs to come first- easily accessible research, or a citizenry that demands easily accessible research. I don't think the concept of open access has made it into the public consciousness, but it may be of interest to the few that actually want to follow footnotes. Mark, I totally agree that we need “an educated citizenry that is not only not put off by a footnote but actively wants them so they can check sources” as you say. I wonder what needs to come first- easily accessible research, or a citizenry that demands easily accessible research.

I don’t think the concept of open access has made it into the public consciousness, but it may be of interest to the few that actually want to follow footnotes.

]]> By: Mark http://www.nirak.net/2007/12/23/does-quoting-scholarly-journals-make-something-less-authoritative/#comment-17092 Mark Mon, 24 Dec 2007 14:05:50 +0000 http://www.nirak.net/2007/12/23/does-quoting-scholarly-journals-make-something-less-authoritative/#comment-17092 I find this to be a quite interesting critique. A large number of books geared to a popular audience do not even include useful citations. They generally have a list of "Useful References" or some such but rarely include direct links between specific claims and supporting research via footnotes or endnotes. I can't begin to count the number of times that I've read/heard that "no one will buy a book with footnotes." I'm not so sure how I feel about this specific critique. It has some value but is, as you say, quite naive. I think full disclosure of sources--of whatever kind--is most important in the interim. Probably equally important--but longer to achieve--is an educated citizenry that is not only not put off by a footnote but actively wants them so they can check sources. Once we have that then this critique would carry much more weight. I am also sort of assuming that if we ever reached that point then we might also have access to far more publicly-funded research. But at this point, I do not see this critique as holding much weight. If the critic actually points out specific cases (and a significant percentage) where publicly-available research can support the same claims as are based on the author's use of harder-to-access material then in that specific case this specific criticism would have greater relevance. I find this to be a quite interesting critique. A large number of books geared to a popular audience do not even include useful citations.

They generally have a list of “Useful References” or some such but rarely include direct links between specific claims and supporting research via footnotes or endnotes.

I can’t begin to count the number of times that I’ve read/heard that “no one will buy a book with footnotes.”

I’m not so sure how I feel about this specific critique. It has some value but is, as you say, quite naive. I think full disclosure of sources–of whatever kind–is most important in the interim. Probably equally important–but longer to achieve–is an educated citizenry that is not only not put off by a footnote but actively wants them so they can check sources. Once we have that then this critique would carry much more weight. I am also sort of assuming that if we ever reached that point then we might also have access to far more publicly-funded research.

But at this point, I do not see this critique as holding much weight. If the critic actually points out specific cases (and a significant percentage) where publicly-available research can support the same claims as are based on the author’s use of harder-to-access material then in that specific case this specific criticism would have greater relevance.

]]>