Abstract
This paper is an empirical analysis of the way in which a group of scientists sought to maximize the attractiveness of one of their papers. It records negotiations about the title, the introduction, and the second paragraph (in which a polymer was characterized). The analysis suggests that scientists array or `network' particulars in a way which they hope will allocate appropriate relative value to elements of that array. In doing so, three factors — the citation of colleagues, the display of facts, and problems of syntax — have to be simultaneously juggled.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.