문제 퀄 평가좀
---
Peer review is a cornerstone of scientific research, intended to ensure the quality and validity of published studies. However, this process has limitations that can affect the advancement of science. Peer review often relies on the opinions of a limited number of reviewers, which can lead to biases or narrow viewpoints. Reviewers may favor studies that align with current theories or those that are more likely to produce positive results, potentially overlooking innovative or unconventional research.
Additionally, the peer review process can be slow and may not always identify flaws in experimental design or analysis. This can delay the dissemination of important findings and impact the reproducibility of research. The system's emphasis on publication quantity over quality can also lead to pressure on researchers to produce results quickly, sometimes at the expense of thoroughness.
**_____________________________**
If these issues are not addressed, the peer review process may hinder scientific progress rather than facilitating it.
---
**Question:**
1. Consequently, the peer review system may inadvertently perpetuate existing biases and limit the scope of scientific inquiry.
2. Thus, the constraints of peer review can result in the exclusion of valuable but unconventional research.
3. Therefore, the peer review process might contribute to the slow advancement of scientific knowledge.
4. As a result, peer review may not always ensure the rigor and validity of scientific studies.
5. In conclusion, the limitations of peer review highlight the need for more innovative approaches to evaluating scientific research.
**Answer:**
Option
---
###
Scientific research often relies on funding from various sources, including government agencies, private companies, and non-profits. However, the source of funding can introduce biases into research outcomes. Studies funded by private companies may be more likely to produce results that favor the sponsor’s interests, potentially skewing the scientific evidence. Furthermore, the competitive nature of funding can pressure researchers to focus on topics that are more likely to attract financial support rather than on high-risk, high-reward research. This can lead to a concentration of resources in certain areas while neglecting others that are equally important but less lucrative. **_____________________________** If these biases are not addressed, funding sources may distort scientific research priorities and outcomes, impacting the integrity of scientific knowledge.
---
**Question:**
Which of the following best completes the blank in the article?
1. funding biases may compromise the objectivity of scientific research and skew results in favor of certain interests.
2.the reliance on specific funding sources can shape research priorities and influence outcomes.
3. the impact of funding on research may lead to a focus on topics that are more commercially viable rather than scientifically valuable.
4. funding biases can affect the impartiality and breadth of scientific studies.
5. addressing funding biases is essential for maintaining the integrity and diversity of scientific research.
**Answer:**
Option
0 XDK (+0)
유익한 글을 읽었다면 작성자에게 XDK를 선물하세요.
-
이런책 없나
-
1회차 풀고 해설지 버렸는네 뒤에 2,3회 해설지 같이 있다는걸 오늘 알아서 ㅠㅠ 덕코로 사례할게요
-
풀어보고싶긴한데 서킷 끼워팔기때메 사기싫음
-
ㅎㅇ 4
-
미디어의 폐해
-
차마 이걸 풀이라고 올리진 못하겠음 (21번은 다른 경우들 본다고 확통 페이지에 더 풀긴 했었음
-
이유가 머임
-
"월급 절반 나누자"…병무청 설립 이후 첫 '대리 입대' 적발 4
[앵커] 다른 사람을 대신해 군에 입대하고 실제 석 달 동안 군 생활을 한 20대...
-
걍 절댓값때고 푸는게 훨 편한데
-
안좋은일이 더 많나요 좋은일도 그만큼 많은데 뉴스에 안나오는게 아닐까요
-
9모 잘본줄알았는데 실채점 나오니 좆망 10모 커리어하이 수능 10모보단 떨어졌지만...
-
왜 19번이 안 풀리지? 왜 20번이 안 풀리지? 왜 28번이 안 풀리지?
-
이투스 빼고 다 2컷 76인데 등급컷 1점정도 내려가는 경우가 많나요..???
-
고3 현역노베입니다. 수상수하 는 따로 공부했고 수1수2기하 시발점으로 개념강의...
-
사탐도 실모치면 어이없게 틀리고 과거의 난 왜 수학을 포기했던것인가 긍정..긍정..
-
내 책상 2
수탐 이제 N제들어가는 ㅈ 허수의 책상....
-
드릴 개꿀잼이네 1
한 달 전에 드릴 처음 푸는 허수
-
지구 이제 실모 첨풀려고하는데 다는 못할거같고 셋중에 우선순위 정해서 순서대로...
-
요즘 경제 지문만 본 기분이라 법 공부 건너뛰고 과학 인문 예술 기술 경제만 파도 되나
-
철원 (1호선) 원주 (경강선, 경의중앙선)
선지들 촘촘하네요 ㄷㄷ