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.
-
흠
-
마지막 문장 ‘미루나무 그늘 아래에서 7월은 더위를 잊은 채 깜빡 잠이 들었다.’...
-
아니 대체 왜 10월에 모기가 있는거임..
-
나는 왜 엽록체가 없는 것이야
-
고3 11모 1
학교에서 고3 11모 친다던데 사실인가여 저희만 치는건가요 11월 1일인가 뭐라하던데ㅔ
-
수학 실모 하루 1개면 충분한가?아님 더 해야되나? 공부량이 좀 적은가 싶음
-
이런 경우 많은가요? 작년 이감은 다른 거랑 비슷하게 80 전후 나왔었는데 왜......
-
모래주머니효과 오히려좋아 ㅎㅎㅎㅎㅎ^^^^^
-
스카 다닐 땐 6시간 자도 피곤했는데 잇올 다니니까 생활패턴 고정돼서 4시간 자도 무난쓰하구만
-
한번쓰면 지울 수 없어서 무지성으로 써내려가게 되지않고 충분히 고민해본 뒤에 쓰게됨
-
연세대 논술 누가 더 몰래 잘 배끼나 따지는 전형인거죠? 1
재시험 안보면 그냥 쌤들한테 연락돌려서 몰래 배낀사람이 이길텐데 누가누가...
-
지구 물리 드디어 과탐 개념 다 끝났다! 근데 앞단원 개념들 벌써 까먹은 것 같아서...
-
감속팽창 질문 1
감속팽창한다고 해서 우주 파장이 짧아지는 건 아니죠? 여전히 팽창하니까 파장은 길어지나요?
-
ㅇㅇ
-
이감 파이널 (시즌5, 시즌6) 다 풀었는데 이제 뭐할까? 1
이감 전회차를 푼 건 아니고 파이널에 해당하는 시즌5, 시즌6만 풀었음 이제 국어...
-
졸립군아... 2
자게 해다오...
-
"전쟁이 김정은에 무슨 이익을 가져다줄까?"를 생각하면 됨. 전쟁은 반드시 국가의...
-
너만을 사무치게 그리워 하였다
-
죽음이다 진짜
선지들 촘촘하네요 ㄷㄷ