문제 퀄 평가좀
게시글 주소: https://iu.orbi.kr/00068898278
---
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.
-
넓이로 요리조리 하는거 재밌네요강대x는 어떨까
-
저렇게 바이럴할 시간에 공부나 열심히 하시지..
-
짤녀 어떰? 2
우리 애깅이
-
활동을 안하게 되네
-
O에서 빛이 동시에 출발한 거라고 보는건가요? 아니면 광원에서 먼저 발생한 빛...
-
통통이와는 급이 다른 재미
-
표본도 시험도
-
내신 몇 이신가요..?
-
너무 심심하니까 공부가 안 되네요
-
. 1
씻어야겠구먼
-
그게 나야 바 둠바 두비두밥~ ^^
-
아니 쓴지 2년 넘은 버즈2보다 4달쓴 버즈fe가 먼저 고장남;; 삼성삼성아..
-
수학 실모 풀 때 문제 조건,발문 잘못 읽는건 어떻게 고쳐야할까요 1
그냥 집중력 문제라고 봐야하나... 맨날 문제의 발문,조건 잘못 읽어서 시간 엄청 많이 날려요 ㅠㅠ
-
버스타고 다니면서 볼게 없어서 이런거라도 보려구요...
-
오늘 서점갔는데 1
서점에서 누가 상상모고 풀고있었음 동질감 들었음...
-
너무 짜릿해 흥분돼 방금 지른 물건들 에어팟 프로 2. 28마넌 첼시 홈 유니폼...
-
가끔 수학에서 못풀고 풀이 봤는데 ‘아니 씁....하...이게맞나? 이건 좀...
-
정립-반정립-종합
-
질문받는다 2
ㄱㄱ
-
퀄리티 차이인가요?
선지들 촘촘하네요 ㄷㄷ