scite Told Me a Study Was Contradicted, and I Almost Cited It Anyway

Citations aren't endorsements. scite shows how later work actually used the paper.

I found a study that fit my argument perfectly. scite showed it had been contradicted three times.

The supporting versus contrasting count is the feature. A high contrast count is a red flag.

I now check scite before citing anything outside my field. Gaps in coverage mean unknown, not safe.

It doesn't replace reading the paper, but it tells me which paper to read first.

Citing a contradicted study is worse than citing none. scite keeps me honest.

その他のガイド

AI ドラフトは送信ボタンではなく出発点です。これが、人間味を保つ 3 パスルーチンです。

避けていた研究論文が徒歩25分かかることになった。ワークフローは愚かですが、それがうまくいった理由です。

受信箱ゼロではありません。何が本物かを判断するループなので、メールに触れるのは 1 日に 2 回だけです。