= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
ChristianKl comments on Open thread, Dec. 14 - Dec. 20, 2015 - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (90)
Short papers get cited more often. Should we believe that the correlation is due to causal factors? Should aspriring researchers keep their titels as short as possible?
Papers with very long titles tend to be about a very narrowly defined problem in a very narrow subfield therefore they get cited less?
Given that all of the correlations reported in the paper are smaller in magnitude than -0.07, and when lumped by journal, smaller than -0.2, I don't think that these observations, statistically "significant" though they are, can be taken as a basis for advice on choosing a title.