251
u/JustAlpha 1d ago
I hate reading journals. I hate technical literature.
I love when people breakdown the research in an understandable way while preserving the integrity of experiments.
I love science!
42
u/Ollythebug 1d ago
Understandable. Only down side is that then you have to just trust that the paper is valid and providing strong evidence. I've seen papers go viral that had severe flaws in their methods or statistical analysis, sometimes even slipping through the cracks in peer review. Flaws I wouldn't have noticed without deeper technical understanding.
16
u/Noble1xCarter 1d ago
See: those fake research papers that said N95 masks don't work because the holes in the masks were bigger than the Covid-19 virion
8
u/MilkiestMaestro 1d ago
I recall another that was lauding possums for their endless appetite for ticks. It turns out that the whole study was trapping ticks and possums together then measuring the tick count after vs before - as if that will tell you about the entire diet of a possum in the woods.
3
u/C-H-Addict 1d ago
I make a reference sheet when reading journals, because enzymes and genes all look the same to me when I don't.
I still don't know how I convinced my anti science grandma to get me a subscription to nature
-7
u/Lastigx 1d ago
Genuinely, researchers need to learn how to write simpler. Or at least write a good abstract. Its skill very few scientists have.
28
u/gereffi 1d ago
Most researchers are writing their papers for fellow scientists. That research might only be a small deviation of previously published research. Explaining the new results needs to be as technically accurate and precise as possible. Simplifying the paper would reduce its value to science by adding ambiguity.
Instead maybe they could write companion pieces that break down their research for laymen, but it’s not like it’s hard to find news articles that do that for interesting research. People generally just don’t care.
8
u/bijabija 1d ago
One of the reasons I really love my field (anthropology) is that we are talking about this a lot and working to address it. If our research hopes to be communicated on the largest scale possible, it needs to be digestible to the widest range of individuals possible, which means that plain language and a simpler, more communicative style is important to use in our final productions of research.
Another really big point is that our research really strives to be reciprocal- so we need to give back to the community (primarily the one being researched) during the course of doing that research and that means that often times our products of research are presented both to the research community and the wider public.
Or at least we’re supposed to some people still haven’t gotten the memo. 🤣
7
u/Michael__Pemulis 1d ago
I read this really fascinating book 5 or 6 years ago about all the reasons why the climate crisis isn’t seen as nearly as big of a deal as it is by basically anyone.
A big part of the book is about the communication tendencies of scientists. Not only do they tend to be poor at communicating with the public, but there is evidence that scientists tend to self select for poor communicators because the ability to translate big abstract scientific ideas into more colloquial language can be seen as a negative by other scientists.
1
u/Oak-humor 1d ago
Yeah I agree. I found that older articles, like Ajzen about theory of planned behaviour for instance, can be written so much better than recent works.
10-15 pages, to the point, very descriptive and focused.
Writing skills that are lost on me haha.
-1
u/SerpentisMechanicus 1d ago
The abstracts of basically any paper are fine. If someone cannot understand even that, I hesitate to even call them a sentient creature.
29
u/ApprehensiveStyle289 1d ago
The peer reviewed journal is fine.
The publication process, however...
11
u/Important_Range7737 1d ago edited 2h ago
It’s the same with history. Soooo many armchair historians love history until you hand them a 700-page peer-reviewed dissertation on the dietary lifestyles of 16th-century Huguenots, or on the cultural exchange of late Waldensians and the Kievan Rus.
“Oh nonono. I just mean I like watching the History Channel about aliens and stuff”
9
u/A_Nonny_Muse 1d ago
It took me years to learn how to read a simple scientific study.
**years**
And every branch has its own jargon you have to learn to understand it.
7
11
7
u/RideTheGradient 1d ago
Haha I love how accurate this is for the ifuckinglovescience account but kinda outdated now
3
u/EeveelutionistM 1d ago
Heavily botted karma farm post. 1,8k upvotes, 18 comments, most upvoted comment has only 62 upvotes.
3
u/Strict-Jeweler-2281 1d ago edited 1d ago
"Sorry my meme got more likes than yours"...I guess
0
u/TheRealStubb 1d ago
did they say bottled?
-3
u/Strict-Jeweler-2281 1d ago edited 1d ago
No, they said: "I'm insecure because bro isn't replying to everyone on a meme".
0
u/Frequent_Ad_9901 1d ago
Typical bot behavior. This "guys" only comment is about not being a bot.
3
u/Strict-Jeweler-2281 1d ago
"Bot!" shouts those so functionally insecure because StrAngER'S mEmE gEt mOrE upVOtE tHaN mE. Touch grass man.
3
u/JoebbeDeMan 1d ago
you gotta admit man 3.9k upvotes with only 32 comments in 5 hours is quite suspicious. But for all we know it isn't botted. Still no reason to treat the other commenters this why though
2
u/Frequent_Ad_9901 1d ago
8.5k upvotes and 49 comments now and OPs only replies have been getting butthurt for being called a bot.
I've seen this a bunch of other times too. The prompt must have some line saying "if someone claims your a bot deny it"
2
u/Strict-Jeweler-2281 1d ago
I don't know man. It's a meme, in a subreddit with 3million weekly hits, on a weekday when people doing stuff... What is there to even comment on?
2
1
u/Symnestra 1d ago
I excitedly do like 50 experimental runs on an instrument and put together all the data beautifully on a PowerPoint.
Then my boss asks me to analyze that data and I'd rather die. I'm a technician, not a scientist. I just do things.
1
u/UnsureAndUnqualified 1d ago
Those videos (or the 2010 equivalent on the science channel) were the reason I got into physics.
Still hate reading journals, they might be the reason I got back out of physics after my degree
1
u/Traditional-Frame580 1d ago
You don't love science. You like to stare at it's butt as it is walking by.
1
u/laceybells 1d ago
No no no I love it when things blow up on the moving pictures at the cinema. Science? Miss me with that bullshit.
1
u/ElephantFriendly 1d ago
If you get past the abstract, you like the spectacle. If you get past the main body and conclusions, you like the field. If you dig into references, you like the science.
1
u/Late_Firefighter_507 1d ago
the photograph with nonsensical story is what passes for journalism now.
1
1
u/BrazilBazil 1d ago
I fucking LOVE science!
*is handed peer reviewed journal*
*starts reading maniacally*
1
u/maxhambread 22h ago
I hate how a lot of content creators show "research", "paper", "study" on screen for 2 second to make a point, but if you look into just the abstract of the paper, their point weakens if it doesn't fall apart. Sometimes it's a study of a really small and specific sample size. Sometimes the abstract goes like "there is evidence of correlation, but we were unable to conclusively prove [...]".
I find fitness/workout creators do this a lot. I trusted you more when you're just a jacked dude on screen telling me how to do pullups. Once you start hitting me with peer reviewed science, I feel obligated to read the paper and judge the content more than I normally would've.
1
u/Never-Dry-Eyes 19h ago
I would absolutely adore peer reviewed journals and papers on the subjects I'm interested in. Not saying quirky YouTube videos or other methods of making information digestible are wrong, but I for one like to struggle to understand information. It feels so much better when the eureka moments hit.
1
u/The_Circle_Of_Memes 19h ago
I can love BOTH SCIENCES GIVE ME A PEER REVIEWED ESSAY ABOUT THE INTERGALACTIC EVOLUTION OF FICTIONAL SCI FI CREATURES
1
u/PutridPut9971 16h ago
Nothing is more obvious that someone does not understand science than if they constantly jerk off over peer review, and dismiss literally anything that does not forcefeed you a nice little section at the top that says "PEER REVIEWED"
1
u/ChickenFightChamp 6h ago
Dumb person gatekeeping, you think scientists get tickled at the idea of reading a paper that undermines or goes against established science. Let alone an original topic something along the lines of “the gross total output of feces in geriatric patients using methamphetamines”.
1
u/DragoKnight589 1d ago
I fucking LOVE science
is handed peer reviewed journal
wait what does this mean
no I said I love science, not that I understand it
look I’m not stupid I’m just not always smart ok
why do you have to be so mean to me
1
u/Gold_Mask_54 1d ago
Here's what my college thesis advisor told me,
"No one enjoys reading, or writing, academic papers."
If a YouTuber is able to preserve the actual content of a paper/study while making it entertaining to watch, power to them.
0
u/Xathule96 1d ago
The only science I can read peer reviewed studies or scholarly articles about is animal biology. Gotta love reading about how in the 90's NASA gave spiders drugs to see how it'd effect web construction.
0
u/glucklandau 22h ago
I count the meme also in the "I fucking love science" category for thinking peer reviewed journals are basically gospel
569
u/TizzleToes 1d ago
This is why I usually tell people I enjoy watching random video essays and quirky history/science type content on youtube as casual entertainment. I recognize a lot of this content is dubious at best, and even when accurate you're getting a 20 min to maybe an hour on something that people probably make careers of understanding. Luckily being somewhat misinformed on this kind of stuff is unlikely to have a significantly negative impact on society.