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
30
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 In 2000-10, roughly 80,000 patients took part in clinical trials based on research that was later withdrawn because of mistakes or improperness.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 government funding agencies have already granted money to figure out how best to encourage replication.
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government funding agencies和encourage replication可以定位到J段第2句。原文提到一些政府机构正着手研究如何鼓励复现已有的科研成果,题中的grant money对应原文的give out $30 billion,而figure out则对应work out,故可确定答案为J段。
转载请注明原文地址:https://jikaoti.com/ti/DXjFFFFM
0
大学英语四级
相关试题推荐
A、Rentagrave.B、Bumthebody.C、Burythedeadnearachurch.D、Buyapieceoflandforagrave.D推理题。文章一开头就讲到“在希腊,只有富人死后才能得到永久
Lookingatthebasicbiologicalsystems,theworldisnotdoingverywell.Yeteconomicindicatorsshowtheworldis【B1】______.
CarbonCaptureHasclimatechangemadeitharderforpeopletocareaboutconservation?A)LastSeptember,assomeonewh
Photographersarealwayslookingfornewinspiration,atleastthegoodonesare.Theireyesareconstantlysearchingforthat【B
Nextmonth,NewYorkstudentsingradesthreethrougheightwilltakethestate’sstandardizedtests:threedaysofexamsdevote
ItisalwaysatoughtasktodecideontheperfectgiftforyourperfectmomonaMother’sDay.Tooffer【B1】______toyourproble
BullyingandChildrenA)Whatyoursonisdescribingisbullying,plainandsimple.Althoughitislateintheschoolyear,yous
BullyingandChildrenA)Whatyoursonisdescribingisbullying,plainandsimple.Althoughitislateintheschoolyear,yous
A、Themaniscallingforadviceaboutmentalproblems.B、Themanisholdingaradioprogram.C、Themanisbeinginterviewedbyt
PeopleworldwidecelebrateNewYearindifferentways.InLatinAmerica,peopleexpresstheirhopesthroughthecoloroftheiru
随机试题
颞下颌关节上腔穿刺成功的标准是________。
健康危险度是指外源化学物
【2011专业案例真题上午卷】某用户根据负荷发展需要,拟在厂区内新建一座变电站,用于厂区内10kV负荷的供电,该变电站电源取自地区110kV电网(无限大电源容量),采用2回110kV架空专用线路供电,变电站基本情况如下:①主变采用两台三相双卷自冷
借贷记账法起源于12世纪的()。
在国际海运危险货物运输中,确定是否属于“易燃液体”的标准主要以货物的()来确定。
制度文书中,制度的内容一般分标题、正文和()三个部分。
为了寻找更为理想的“观察植物细胞有丝分裂”的实验材料以及探究不同材料适宜的取材时间,科研人员进行了如下实验:步骤1:剔除大蒜蒜瓣和红葱的老根,置于装有适量清水的烧杯中,在20~25℃下培养,每2d更换一次清水。步骤2:待大蒜和红葱的须根长出后,每24
20世纪法国统一学校运动的重要内容是()。
WhatdoesGoogleplantodo?
Fancyathree-dayweekend—notjustonceinawhilebutweekinweekout?Youmaythinkyourbosseswouldneveragreetoit,but
最新回复
(
0
)