I have seen many beautiful short answers, but they are neglected and overshadowed by the longer ones.

• Possibly, but there are some counter examples. You might be able to use the Stack Exchange Data Explorer to find out if there is a relation. Apr 13 '17 at 18:38
• I have used it and found similar results Apr 13 '17 at 18:40
• Well do you plan on posting your findings? Or are you wanting others to confirm it for you? Apr 13 '17 at 18:41
• I just want others views on this Apr 13 '17 at 18:43
• Well can you post a link to your SEDE query so that someone else can use that as a starting point for their own answer? Apr 13 '17 at 18:44
• Ya sure.I will.Just waiting for a few answers. Apr 13 '17 at 18:45
• So, you 'know' the answer but want others to check? Seems, well, like key a homework problem... Lets face it - some people are more verbose then others. Apr 13 '17 at 23:54
• This is a difficult question to address as it's currently worded. It asks if there is an overall trend, which completely devalues any specific examples of short answers being more highly voted. Plus, there are far too many confounding factors to get a very clear picture from the SEDE. For instance, often times a longer answer means more time, care, and research was put into it, which makes it more likely to be voted up because it is more correct and complete. To find the proper trend, you'd need to only compare posts of equal content value but differing length, which is difficult to determine
– Jim
Apr 17 '17 at 13:00

I wrote a SEDE query for the task. The results:

What we can see here, is the following:

• Yes, the average score of the answers grows monotonically with their length (I grouped them in 20% growing groups).
• The length distribution of the answers follows a very beautyful Boltzmann-distribution with a maximum of around 800-1000 bytes.
• But, the average score per text length, measured in $\frac{\mathrm{upvote}}{\mathrm{kByte}}$, shows an obviously shrinking tendency, and sets to a roughly constant $\approx 1.2 \frac{\mathrm{upvote}}{\mathrm{kByte}}$ from around 3 kByte answer length.
• If you post 2 1kB answers, you can count with around 50% more upvotes as if you post a single 2kB one.
• There is also a very high per-length reward for very short answers (in the <200byte region). But, in my opinion, it is practically impossible to write ten 100byte-length answer in the time as you would write an 1000byte one.
• Note: a significant part of the work behind answering a question is not typing it in. This part is not measured in this stat.
• This stat doesn't count with downvotes and with deleted posts. The first would be easy but I didn't count with them. More exactly, this query counts only the voting scores. The second is impossible as the content of the deleted posts are hidden by the SEDE, thus we can't measure their length.
• This query measures only the vote score of the answers, it can't measure their actual value. We could get a better estimation of it by overweighting the votes of the high-rep users in the average counts, but also the induvidual votes are hidden in the SEDE.

I think the answer is partially yes, partially not.

More exactly, we have different secondary effects which can increase the score of the answers. All of these are my subjective experience, I don't have SEDE queries to support them (although I could produce some if needed):

1. Its general quality on the first spot, correct grammar & spelling
2. The reputation of the poster (additional psychological effect if he has some golden badges, too)
3. Including a beautiful picture in the answer