首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
How science goes wrong Scientific research has changed the world. Now it needs to change itself. A)A simple idea underli
How science goes wrong Scientific research has changed the world. Now it needs to change itself. A)A simple idea underli
admin
2014-12-12
38
问题
How science goes wrong
Scientific research has changed the world. Now it needs to change itself.
A)A simple idea underlies science: "trust, but verify". Results should always be subject to challenge from experiment. That simple but powerful idea has generated a vast body of knowledge. Since its birth in the 17th century, modern science has changed the world beyond recognition, and overwhelmingly for the better. But success can breed extreme self-satisfaction. Modern scientists are doing too much trusting and not enough verifying, damaging the whole of science, and of humanity. B)Too many of the findings are the result of cheap experiments or poor analysis. A rule of thumb among biotechnology venture-capitalists is that half of published research cannot be replicated(复制). Even that may be optimistic. Last year researchers at one biotech firm, Amgen, found they could reproduce just six of 53 "milestone" studies in cancer research. Earlier, a group at Bayer, a drug company, managed to repeat just a quarter of 67 similarly important papers. A leading computer scientist worries that three-quarters of papers in his subfield are nonsense. In 2000-10, roughly 80,000 patients took part in clinical trials based on research that was later withdrawn because of mistakes or improperness.
What a load of rubbish
C)Even when flawed research does not put people’s lives at risk—and much of it is too far from the market to do so—it blows money and the efforts of some of the world’s best minds. The opportunity costs of hindered progress are hard to quantify, but they are likely to be vast. And they could be rising.
D)One reason is the competitiveness of science. In the 1950s, when modern academic research took shape after its successes in the Second World War, it was still a rarefied(小众的)pastime. The entire club of scientists numbered a few hundred thousand. As their ranks have swelled to 6m -7m active researchers on the latest account, scientists have lost their taste for self-policing and quality control. The obligation to "publish or perish(消亡)" has come to rule over academic life. Competition for jobs is cut-throat. Full professors in America earned on average $135,000 in 2012—more than judges did. Every year six freshly minted PhDs strive for every academic post. Nowadays verification(the replication of other people’s results)does little to advance a researcher’s career. And without verification, uncertain findings live on to mislead.
E)Careerism also encourages exaggeration and the choose-the-most-profitable of results. In order to safeguard their exclusivity, the leading journals impose high rejection rates: in excess of 90% of submitted manuscripts. The most striking findings have the greatest chance of making it onto the page. Little wonder that one in three researchers knows of a colleague who has polished a paper by, say, excluding inconvenient data from results based on his instinct, And as more research teams around the world work on a problem, it is more likely that at least one will fall prey to an honest confusion between the sweet signal of a genuine discovery and a nut of the statistical noise. Such lake correlations are often recorded in journals eager for startling papers. If they touch on drinking wine, or letting children play video games, they may well command the front pages of newspapers, too.
F)Conversely, failures to prove a hypothesis(假设)are rarely even offered for publication, let alone accepted. "Negative results" now account for only 14% of published papers, down from 30% in 1990. Yet knowing what is false is as important to science as knowing what is true. The failure to report failures means that researchers waste money and effort exploring blind alleys already investigated by other scientists.
G)The holy process of peer review is not all it is praised to be, either. When a prominent medical journal ran research past other experts in the field, it found that most of the reviewers failed to spot mistakes it had deliberately inserted into papers, even after being told they were being tested.
If it’s broke, fix it
H)All this makes a shaky foundation for an enterprise dedicated to discovering the truth about the world. What might be done to shore it up? One priority should be for all disciplines to follow the example of those that have done most to tighten standards. A start would be getting to grips with statistics, especially in the growing number of fields that screen through untold crowds of data looking for patterns. Geneticists have done this, and turned an early stream of deceptive results from genome sequencing(基因组测序)into a flow of truly significant ones.
I)Ideally, research protocols(草案)should be registered in advance and monitored in virtual notebooks. This would curb the temptation to manipulate the experiment’s design midstream so as to make the results look more substantial than they are.(It is already meant to happen in clinical trials of drugs.)
Where possible, trial data also should be open for other researchers to inspect and test.
J)The most enlightened journals are already showing less dislike of tedious papers. Some government funding agencies, including America’s National Institutes of Health, which give out $30 billion on research each year, are working out how best to encourage replication. And growing numbers of scientists, especially young ones, understand statistics. But these trends need to go much further. Journals should allocate space for "uninteresting" work, and grant-givers should set- aside money to pay for it. Peer review should be tightened—or perhaps dispensed with altogether, in favour of post-publication evaluation in the form of appended comments. That system has worked well in recent years in physics and mathematics. Lastly, policymakers should ensure that institutions using public money also respect the rules.
K)Science still commands enormous—if sometimes perplexed—respect. But its privileged status is founded on the capacity to be right most of the time and to correct its mistakes when it gets things wrong. And it is not as if the universe is short of genuine mysteries to keep generations of scientists hard at work. The false trails laid down by cheap research are an unforgivable barrier to understanding.
The most enlightened journals are more willing to accept dull papers than before.
选项
答案
J
解析
本题涉及对于目前学术问题的整治办法,可知答案应在If it’s broke,fix it标题下的内容查找。由journals和accept dull papers可定位到J段第1句。题目中的are more willing to accept dull papers对应原文的showing less dislike of tedious papers,可见本题是对J段第1句的同义替换,故选J。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/2Iq7777K
0
大学英语四级
相关试题推荐
A、Thetraffic.B、Theweather.C、Theirhealth.D、Theirtimetable.B对话中男士提到aperfectdayforstayinginside(非常适合在家里待着的一天),女士提到gloo
A、Bydoortodooradvertising.B、Byusingsymbols.C、Byverbalannouncements.D、Bywrittenmessages.C选项均为“By+现在分词”开头以及其中的advert
A、Thesizeofthecampus.B、Thecitybussystem.C、Thelengthoftimeforeachclass.D、Theuniversitybussystem.D选项全是名词短语,问对话
Complainingaboutfaultygoodsorbadserviceisnevereasy.Ifsomethingyouhaveboughtis【B1】______,youareactuallynotask
A、Eatthemless.B、Eatchocolatesonly.C、Eatsweetdairyinstead.D、Eatnomorehamburgers.A题干询问关于垃圾食物,女士建议男士做什么。对话中,女士说男士喜欢吃的
A、Readingabook.B、Listeningtomusic.C、Sleepingforawhile.D、ChattingwithothersB题干考查男士通常如何在火车上打发时间。对话中提到男士通常(在火车上)听音乐,这有
InastudypublishedWednesday,collegestudentswhowereaskedtocompleteanagrams(字谜)whileanearbyresearchertalkedonher
A、Thesefactoriesproducedmachinesinthepast.B、Thesefactoriesproducedfarmtoolsinthepast.C、Thesefactoriesmanufactur
UniversitiesBranchOutA)Asneverbeforeintheirlonghistory,universitieshavebecomeinstrumentsofnationalcompetitiona
随机试题
A.T淋巴细胞B.B淋巴细胞C.单核-巨噬细胞D.嗜碱细胞具有变形运动和吞噬能力,并参与激活淋巴细胞特异功能的是
托姆斯颗粒层位于
高血压性心脏病左心室增大,其心脏浊音界呈()
ABO血型系统的分型依据是
麻黄素单方制剂处方留存麻醉药品处方留存
背景资料:某承包人承接了一座大桥工程,该桥采用ϕ1.6m的桩基础,桩长约25~32m;桥位处地层均为天然砂砾,地下水位在原地面下约1.5m处。其桩基主要施工过程如下:平整场地、用水准仪进行桩位放样、埋设钢护筒、选用正循环回旋钻机作为成孔
以下不属于受教育者义务的是()。
有以下程序#include<iostream>usingnamespacestd;classMyClass{public:staticints;MyClass();voi
让世界充满爱,因为爱使世界运转,而且使它变得更好。(goaround)
Thefollowingisaletter.Afterreadingit,youshouldcompletetheinformationbyfillingintheblanksmarked46through50i
最新回复
(
0
)