Upgrade StorageHow to mark and extract secondary claims using Zotfile
Hello all,
I would like to make (more) use of Zotfiles "extract annotations" option.
When I markup and extract primary results and conclusions from a paper, all is well and good.
My trouble is with the references in a paper's discussion-part.
Often, I will have to track these paraphrased claims in the paper (referring to another paper). Sometimes I'll address a misattribution, sometimes I simply cannot obtain the original paper (yet at least).
What I would like was a way to mark a secondary claim together with the secondary reference. Something, ideally, like:
"Smith (1931) according to Jones (1962)"
Have anyone found a smart way of doing that?
Right now, I'm considering marking up such secondary claims in a different highlight colour and putting the secondary reference in the annotation field of my highlight - but that's an awfully manual way of doing so, and the different highlight colour doesn't get extracted, so I'll probably not notice, if I inadvertently misattribute a secondary claim as primary.
Any tips, advice or pointers to optimal usage of Zotfile greatly appreciated.
I would like to make (more) use of Zotfiles "extract annotations" option.
When I markup and extract primary results and conclusions from a paper, all is well and good.
My trouble is with the references in a paper's discussion-part.
Often, I will have to track these paraphrased claims in the paper (referring to another paper). Sometimes I'll address a misattribution, sometimes I simply cannot obtain the original paper (yet at least).
What I would like was a way to mark a secondary claim together with the secondary reference. Something, ideally, like:
"Smith (1931) according to Jones (1962)"
Have anyone found a smart way of doing that?
Right now, I'm considering marking up such secondary claims in a different highlight colour and putting the secondary reference in the annotation field of my highlight - but that's an awfully manual way of doing so, and the different highlight colour doesn't get extracted, so I'll probably not notice, if I inadvertently misattribute a secondary claim as primary.
Any tips, advice or pointers to optimal usage of Zotfile greatly appreciated.
https://www.zotero.org/support/kb/secondary_citation
The link above addresses what I'm trying to achieve, but the solution outlined depends on adding the info into the prefix field of the word processor plugin.
I'm looking for a (somewhat) automated way of populating this field from the PDF highlighting and keeping the information within the Zotero database.
I think that each citation ought to have its own metadata. That's what I have been used to when dabbling in genalogy. I do use Zotero in medical research, but I believe the principle of evaluating individual citations from a given source is a sound one in medicine, too.
It was merely a question to fellow Zotfile-users if anyone had found themselves a good way of tracking and citing secondary assertations (not citations) found in their sources.
In my line of research, there are frequent secondary misattributions to be found and checked, and sometimes they will have to be cited and argued against. Marking them up using Zotfile extracts them similarly to direct and primary evidence, and I at least will need a way to distinguish the two types of extractions.