首页
登录
职称英语
Jan Hendrik Schon’s success seemed too good to be true, and it was. In only f
Jan Hendrik Schon’s success seemed too good to be true, and it was. In only f
游客
2023-12-17
47
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, which 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.
If it sounds a lot like the fall of Hwang Woo Suk — the South Korean researcher who fabricated his evidence about cloning human cells — it is. Scientific scandals, which are as old as science itself, tend to follow similar patterns of hubris and comeuppance. Afterwards, colleagues wring their hands and wonder how such malfeasance can be avoided in the future. But it never is entirely. Science is built on the honor system; the method of peer-review, in which manuscripts are evaluated by experts in the field, is not meant to catch cheats. 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 raised anew by Hwang’s fall are whether Nature and Science have become too powerful as arbiters of what science reaches 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; cell biologists have Cell; 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 accolades of 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 are also trying to reach other scientists through Science and Nature, not just the public. 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 oft-cited 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:
Whether die clamor to appear in these journals has any bearing on their ability to catch fraud is another matter. The fact is that fraud is terrifically hard to spot. Consider the process Science used to evaluate Hwang’s 2005 article. Science editors recognized the manuscript’s import almost as soon as it arrived. As part of the standard procedure, they sent it to two members of its Board of Reviewing Editors, who recommended that it go out for peer review (about 30 percent of manuscripts pass this test). This recommendation was made not on the scientific validity of the paper, but on its "novelty, originality, and trendiness", says Denis Duboule, a geneticist at the University of Geneva and a member of Science’s Board of Reviewing Editors, in the January 6 issue of Science.
After this, Science sent the paper to three stem-cell experts, who had a week to look it over. Their comments were favorable. How were they to know that the data was fraudulent? "You look at the data and do not assume it’s fraud," says one reviewer, anonymously, in Science.
In the end, a big scandal now and then isn’t likely to do much damage to the big scientific journals. What editors and scientists worry about more are the myriad smaller infractions that occur all the time, and which are almost impossible to detect. A Nature survey of scientists published last June found that one-third of all respondents had committed some forms of misconduct. These included falsifying research data and having "questionable relationships" with students and subjects — both charges leveled against Hwang. Nobody really knows if this kind of fraud is on the rise, but it is worrying.
Science editors don’t have any plans to change the basic editorial peer-review process as a result of the Hwang scandal. They do have plans to scrutinize photographs more closely in an effort to spot instances of fraud, but that policy change had already been decided when the scandal struck. And even if it had been in place, it would not have revealed that Hwang had misrepresented photographs from two stem cell colonies as coming from 11 colonies. With the financial and deadline pressures of the publishing industry, it’s unlikely that the journals are going to take markedly stronger measures to vet manuscripts. Beyond replicating the experiments themselves, which would be impractical, it’s difficult to see what they could do to make Science beyond the honor system. [br]
选项
答案
C
解析
细节题。第三段指出,每个科学研究领域都有自己的权威期刊,故B不对;接着说,《科学》和《自然》之所以非常重要是因为它们是惟一涵盖所有科学研究领域的期刊,因此很多科学家都会阅读这两种期刊以获得研究领域内的前沿消息和动向,故c正确。选项A、D原文未提及。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3280355.html
相关试题推荐
HarryTrumandidn’tthinkhissuccessorhadtherighttrainingtobepresident
HarryTrumandidn’tthinkhissuccessorhadtherighttrainingtobepresident
Oneofthemostsuccessfulcommercialproductseverlaunchedissaidtohave
Oneofthemostsuccessfulcommercialproductseverlaunchedissaidtohave
Oneofthemostsuccessfulcommercialproductseverlaunchedissaidtohave
Oneofthemostsuccessfulcommercialproductseverlaunchedissaidtohave
Oneofthemostsuccessfulcommercialproductseverlaunchedissaidtohave
Oneofthemostsuccessfulcommercialproductseverlaunchedissaidtohave
Allofuswouldagreethatinordertobesuccessfulinthepresent-daysocie
Successfulagingisalsoapsychologicalfeat.Loneliness,forexample,cans
随机试题
【B1】[br]【B20】A、murderB、hurtC、killD、woundB上句中提到injure“伤害”,此句中又出现副词even“甚至”
NationalAviationandSpaceAdministration(NASA)anditspartnersintheInte
地下汽车库配置灭火器时,计算单元的最小需配灭火级别计算应比地上汽车库增加()。
电视评论的常用形式有()A.口播评论 B.字幕评论 C.图像评论 D.专
下列各项中关于胃癌诊断的叙述应高度警惕的是()A.40岁以后开始出现中
母基金为缺乏经验的投资者提供了投资股权投资基金的渠道,这体现了股权投资母基金的(
材料: 在儿童节前夕,春田花花幼儿园受到其他学校的邀请,准备排练节目。花花是春
某桥梁中一个支座压力标准值(由结构自重标准值和汽车荷载标准值(计入冲击系数)引起
引起潮热的原因有A.阴虚阳亢 B.气虚发热 C.外感风热 D.湿遏热伏
男性,46岁,右季肋部不适、食欲下降2年,腹胀、下肢水肿1个月,近4天来腹痛、
最新回复
(
0
)