首页
登录
职称英语
Jan Hendrik Schon’s success seemed too good to be true, and it was. In only
Jan Hendrik Schon’s success seemed too good to be true, and it was. In only
游客
2025-04-26
24
管理
问题
Jan Hendrik Schon’s success seemed too good to be true, and it was. In only four years as a physicist at Bell Laboratories, Schon, 32, had co-authored 90 scientific papers—one every 16 days—detailing new discoveries in superconductivity, lasers, nano-technology and quantum physics. This output astonished his colleagues, and made them suspicious. When one co-worker noticed that the same table of data appeared in two separate papers—which also happened to appear in the two most prestigious scientific journals in the world, Science and Nature—the jig was up. In October 2002, a Bell Labs investigation found that Schon had falsified and fabricated data. His career as a scientist was finished. Scientific scandals, which are as old as science itself, tend to follow similar patterns of presumption and due reward.
In recent years, of course, the pressure on scientists to publish in the top journals has increased, making the journals much more crucial to career success. The questions are whether Nature and Science have become too powerful as arbiters of what science reaches to the public, and whether the journals are up to their task as gatekeepers.
Each scientific specialty has its own set of journals. Physicists have Physical Review Letters, neuroscientists have Neuron, and so forth. Science and Nature, though, are the only two major journals that cover the gamut of scientific disciplines, from meteorology and zoology to quantum physics and chemistry. As a result, journalists look to them each week for the cream of the crop of new science papers. And scientists look to the journals in part to reach journalists. Why do they care? Competition for grants has gotten so fierce that scientists have sought popular renown to gain an edge over their rivals. Publication in specialized journals will win the acclaims from academics and satisfy the publish-or-perish imperative, but Science and Nature come with the added bonus of potentially getting your paper written up in the New York Times and other publications.
Scientists tend to pay more attention to the big two than to other journals. When more scientists know about a particular paper, they’re more apt to cite it in their own papers. Being oftcited will increase a scientist’s "Impact Factor", a measure of how often papers are cited by peers. Funding agencies use the "Impact Factor" as a rough measure of the influence of scientists they’re considering supporting. [br] The achievements of Jan Hendrik Schon turned out to be______.
选项
A、surprising
B、inconceivable
C、praiseworthy
D、fraudulent
答案
D
解析
推理题。此题解题点在第一段的“In October 2002,a Bell Labs investigation found that Schon had falsified and fabricated data”。A项意为“令人惊讶的”,B项意为“不可思议的”,C项意为“值得表扬的”,D项意为是“欺诈的,不诚实的”。只有D项与falsified and fabricated同义,因此正确答案是D项。
转载请注明原文地址:http://tihaiku.com/zcyy/4054707.html
相关试题推荐
Whatdotheextraordinarilysuccessfulcompanieshaveincommon?To
Whatdotheextraordinarilysuccessfulcompanieshaveincommon?To
Whatdotheextraordinarilysuccessfulcompanieshaveincommon?To
Astrongsupportfromthelocalauthorityis______tothesuccessoftheprojec
JanHendrikSchon’ssuccessseemedtoogoodtobetrue,anditwas.Inonly
JanHendrikSchon’ssuccessseemedtoogoodtobetrue,anditwas.Inonly
Neverhasastraitjacketseemedsoill-fittingorsoinsecure.TheEuroarea
Neverhasastraitjacketseemedsoill-fittingorsoinsecure.TheEuroarea
Thelocalauthoritiesseemedto______fortheaccidentthattookplacelastwee
Whatdotheextraordinarilysuccessfulcompanieshaveincommon?Tofindout
随机试题
【B1】[br]【B19】A、liftB、lostC、laidD、leftD那个男的把手提包遗留在了车里。left…behind留下,遗留;lift
人权是法的源泉,法是人权的体现和保障。人权与国家法律之间存在不可分割的关系,两者
最常用于胰腺癌辅助诊断及术后随访指标的实验室检查项目是A.CEA.B.AFP
以下疾病常有晕厥发作并可能猝死A.预激综合征 B.肥厚型心肌病 C.室间隔缺
女,10岁。诊断为先天性肌斜颈,不需要与哪项病理相鉴别A.锁骨骨折 B.先
新课程改革强调将学生学习知识的过程转化为形成正确价值观的过程,其价值观是指()。
A.未曾在中国境内上市销售的药品 B.已有国家药品标准的药品 C.改变给药途
关于梗死的描述,不正确的是 A.动脉痉挛促进梗死形成 B.梗死多由动脉阻塞引
甲家盖房,邻居乙、丙前来帮忙。施工中,丙因失误从高处摔下受伤,乙不小心撞伤小孩丁
下列不属于雌激素禁忌证的是A.乳腺癌 B.生殖系统恶性肿瘤 C.儿童禁用
最新回复
(
0
)