This is Part II of our Literature Review series. Part I: How to Judge Impact Factors lays the foundation for the focus of this post. If not you’re already familar with accessing impact factors for journals and researchers, give it a quick watch (it’s only 5 minutes) or read the edited transcript. This video and post will focus on:
How to make sure I found the most appropriate papers (by topic), and enough of them (how much is enough?).
In this short 5-minute video, I cover the essentials of analyzing literature networks and judging the impact and continued relevance of a given paper.
Specifically, I discuss these topics in the context of a recent high-impact publication by Jeremy England at MIT:
I defended my thesis and graduated with my PhD in 2013. It was the culmination of a lot of hard work: many blind alleys in the research process, lost weekends, and general sacrifice of well-being. It’s a price that all PhD students pay to some extent. My mentors played an essential role in my success.
I Love Mentors
What did I do when my research got stuck in one of those blind alleys? I’d send an email to someone on this list, a curated list of mentors I acquired during my PhD. My advisor, my fellow peers, researchers I met at conferences: they came from a number of places. When I needed advice on a critical decision about my work, career path? I’d send an email to someone on that list.
All of my mentors were helpful, but there were some game-changing mentors. If you’re lucky, one of these is your PhD advisor. I had the pleasure of working with three amazing advisors during my BS, MS and PhD work. They had several common traits:
- Extremely competent in technical knowledge (something you can grantee every advisor has).
- Balance of mentorship and support, with the goal to produce independent researchers.
While advisors have technical competency, faculty hiring sometimes overvalues it at the expense of good mentorship.
subscribe via RSS