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 underlies
How science goes wrong Scientific research has changed the world. Now it needs to change itself. [A] A simple idea underlies
admin
2017-01-16
54
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 In 2000-10, roughly 80,000 patients took part in clinical trials based on research that was later withdrawn because of mistakes or improperness.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 fake 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.
Some clinical trials from 2000 to 2010 were later abandoned by reason of mistakes or improperness.
选项
答案
B
解析
本题涉及目前学术问题的危害,由clinical trials from 2000 to 2010和mistakes or improperness可以定位到B段最后一句。原文提到2000年到2010年间一些临床试验因为试验所依据的研究存在错误或者不当之处而被撤销,题中by reason of对应原文because of,本题是对B段最后一句的同义转述,故选B。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/CBi7777K
0
大学英语四级
相关试题推荐
CreativeDestructionofHigherEducationA)Highereducationisoneofthegreatsuccessesofthewelfarecountry.Whatwasonce
A、Helooksolderthanhereallyis.B、Heistheonlymathteacherinschool.C、Heisnotyoungenoughtoteachmath.D、Histeach
A、Theyofferachanceforchildrentomakefriends.B、Childrenfrompoorfamiliescan’tjointhem.C、Childrenhavetostayoutsi
A、Theyhavethesamekindofculture.B、Theyarewildindifferentways.C、Theyhavemosttraveledareas.D、Theyhavecuttinged
A、20%ofthefullprice.B、80%ofthefullprice.C、Halfofthefullprice.D、Fullprice.B
Nextmonth,NewYorkstudentsingradesthreethrougheightwilltakethestate’sstandardizedtests:threedaysofexamsdevote
Timeisrunningoutforgovernmentstooverhaulregulationofglobalbanksthathavebecomebiggerandmorepowerfulsincethes
Whatdostudentsthinkofe-textbooks?AdministratorsatNorthwestMissouriStateUniversitywantedto【B1】______.Earlierthisy
AnewstudyfromtheUniversityofNewSouthWaleshasdiscoveredthatduringtheworkingweek,Australianfathersonlyspendan
InFebruarylastyear,mywifelostherjob.Justassuddenly,theownerofthegreenhousewhereIworkedasmanager【B1】______a
随机试题
___________是指船舶、货物遭到共同危险,船方为了共同安全,有意和合理地作出的特别牺牲,或支出的特别费用。
我国《商标法》第52条第1款规定,未经注册商标所有人的许可,在同一种商品或类似商品上使用与其注册商标相同或近似商品的行为的,属于商标侵权行为。这里的“商标侵权行为”属于法律逻辑结构中的
患者,女,47岁。发现右侧乳房内无痛性肿块2个月。体检:右侧乳房外上象限可扪及直径约4Cm的肿块,边界不清,质地硬。局部乳房皮肤出现“橘皮样"改变。经活组织病理学检查示乳腺癌。行乳腺癌改良根治术。该患者乳房皮肤出现“橘皮样”改变,是由于
下列合同中,既可以是有偿合同也可以是无偿合同的有哪些?
在市场营销学中,市场需求反映消费者对某一特定产品或服务的()。[2003年真题]
甲公司是一家上市公司,截至2012年年底,甲公司注册资本为8000万元,经审计的资产总额为20000万元,净资产额为15000万元,最近3年公司实现的可分配利润总额为900万元。甲公司董事会由11名董事组成,其中董事A、董事B、董事C同时为乙公司董事
社会歧视是指社会中的某些个人和群体,因其(),以及其他一些先天或后天的特点而在经济、政治和社会活动中受到不公平的对待。
小刚一按时做完作业,家长就不再批评他,使他逐渐养成按时做作业的习惯。这是运用了行为原理的()。
醉酒的人在醉酒状态中,对本人有危险或者对他人的人身、财产或者公共安全有所威胁的,应当对其采取的保护性措施是()。
甲公司与乙村村委会开办的经济开发公司共同出资设立丙公司,生产新型化工原料。由于资金紧缺未建污水处理池。丙公司将生产废水直接排入小河。村民黄某听说此废水经处理可以代替氨肥使用,即购买了多个大铁罐收集等待出售,因铁罐腐烂,废液渗入院中水井,引起全家中毒。因废水
最新回复
(
0
)