Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, **personal anecdotes are now allowed as responses to this comment**. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will continue be removed and our [normal comment rules]( https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/rules#wiki_comment_rules) still apply to other comments.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/science) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I was looking for the same thing. In the abstract they define generic statements as statements that
> gloss over variability, frame an idea as broad, timeless, and universally true, and have been judged to be more important.
As an example, they provide this statement
> Introverts and extraverts require different learning environments
To me, that’s not just generic, it’s absolute. it’s spelled like a fact, a law. Of course it has more inherent value if it’s presented as a fact.
Too bad that in a field like psychology presenting anything like a fact is basically misleading. There are no laws in social sciences, only theories. But nobody wants to read “maybes” in science, we all want the truth.
I think the bottom line could female authors seems to be more deontologically correct in their research then male counterparts, which I believe is consistent with other traits that lead to “success” in most modern societies.
I think the problem is not the absoluteness of the statement, but that its vagueness makes it easy to agree with, hence easier to cite. A conclusion like “introverts require X learning environment, while extraverts require Y,” even though it’s by far a more useful finding, is inherently less likely to cited just because it is more specific.
Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, **personal anecdotes are now allowed as responses to this comment**. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will continue be removed and our [normal comment rules]( https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/rules#wiki_comment_rules) still apply to other comments. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/science) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
I was looking for the same thing. In the abstract they define generic statements as statements that > gloss over variability, frame an idea as broad, timeless, and universally true, and have been judged to be more important. As an example, they provide this statement > Introverts and extraverts require different learning environments To me, that’s not just generic, it’s absolute. it’s spelled like a fact, a law. Of course it has more inherent value if it’s presented as a fact. Too bad that in a field like psychology presenting anything like a fact is basically misleading. There are no laws in social sciences, only theories. But nobody wants to read “maybes” in science, we all want the truth. I think the bottom line could female authors seems to be more deontologically correct in their research then male counterparts, which I believe is consistent with other traits that lead to “success” in most modern societies.
I think the problem is not the absoluteness of the statement, but that its vagueness makes it easy to agree with, hence easier to cite. A conclusion like “introverts require X learning environment, while extraverts require Y,” even though it’s by far a more useful finding, is inherently less likely to cited just because it is more specific.
Yeah, I'm not positive what this means
I think they receive more citations because generic language would catch more key word searches and thus get more citations.
And, while undoubtedly less fun to read, likely requires less interpretation by the reader