Acceptable scientific references

In summary, the link provided contains a master journal list with a search engine for finding acceptable references when citing scientific theories and published papers. This is necessary for citing obscure or new theories that are not common knowledge. The source must be a peer-reviewed journal recognized by the mainstream academic community, as well as a published paper. Well-considered speculation is allowed for discussion, but a definitive explanation citing a new theory requires a published paper.
  • #1
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
8,142
1,756
If you follow this link you will find the master journal list at the bottom of the page. There is a search engine that allows one to search by a number of different criteria. This is a list of acceptable references when citing scientific theories and published papers. If a journal is not referenced here, the poster must demonstrate that the source is a peer-reviewed journal recognized by the mainstream academic community.

Obviously we reference material published in news and other media sources, but if a specific and obscure, new, or otherwise generally unknown theory [not common knowledge] is to be used as a scientific explanation for a phenomenon, then the theory must be found in a paper published in a journal listed at this link.
http://scientific.thomson.com/index.html

As an example: If it is to be argued that earthlights are caused by piezoelectric phenomena within the Earth's crust, then that theory would require a published paper as a source.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I should make it clear that as always, well cosidered speculation having a scientific basis is fine for the sake of discussion, but any "definitive" explanation citing a new theory requires a published paper.
 
Last edited:
  • #3


Thank you for providing this link to the master journal list. As a scientist, it is important to use reliable and credible sources when citing scientific theories and published papers. This list allows for easy access to peer-reviewed journals, which are considered to be the gold standard in scientific research.

It is crucial to note that not all sources are created equal, and using non-peer-reviewed sources can lead to inaccuracies and misinformation being spread. By following this list and ensuring that all sources are from recognized and reputable journals, we can maintain the integrity and validity of scientific research.

Additionally, it is important to critically evaluate any sources that are not listed on this master journal list. While they may still be valuable sources of information, it is essential to verify the credibility and reliability of the journal before using it as a reference.

In conclusion, I highly recommend utilizing this master journal list when citing scientific theories and published papers. It not only ensures the accuracy of information but also upholds the standards of the scientific community.
 

1. What makes a scientific reference acceptable?

An acceptable scientific reference is one that comes from a reliable and reputable source, such as a peer-reviewed journal, academic textbook, or government agency. It should also be relevant to the topic being discussed and provide evidence or data to support the claims being made.

2. Can I use popular media sources as scientific references?

While popular media sources may provide interesting information, they are not generally considered acceptable scientific references. This is because they may not be based on rigorous research or may present biased or incomplete information. It is best to stick to peer-reviewed sources for scientific references.

3. How can I tell if a website is a credible scientific reference?

To determine if a website is a credible scientific reference, you should look for indicators such as the author's credentials, the date of publication, and any references or sources cited. Websites that end in .gov, .edu, or .org are often more reliable than those with .com endings. It is always best to cross-check information with other sources to ensure accuracy.

4. Are older scientific references still acceptable?

In general, the most recent scientific research is considered the most reliable. However, older references can still be acceptable if they provide important foundational information or have been cited by more recent studies. It is important to consider the age of the reference and whether more recent research has been conducted on the topic.

5. Can I use personal opinions or experiences as scientific references?

No, personal opinions or experiences are not considered acceptable scientific references. Scientific research is based on objective data and evidence, not subjective opinions. It is important to use reliable and verifiable sources in order to maintain the credibility and validity of scientific claims.

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
Replies
12
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • STEM Career Guidance
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Biology and Medical
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
96
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
21
Views
1K
  • General Discussion
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • Sticky
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
1
Views
4K
Back
Top