문제 퀄 평가좀
게시글 주소: https://i.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.
-
정원대비 티오가 좋고 본34 서울실습이 장점이라 들었는데(수도권 사람임) 다른...
-
오류 논란있던 문항들 왜 오류 논란있는지 1도 모르겠는데ㅋㅋㅋㅋ 오류 주장하는 글들...
-
해설좋은 문제집 뭐가있나요? 인강강사분꺼가 좋은건지 아니면 마더텅해설도괜찮나요? 국영수 다요
-
건물 위층에 만화카페있는데
-
교대생 4
오르비에 교대생 계신가요? 질문좀 받아주세요
-
맨처음에는 무지성으로 리미트 한번씩은 취해보지않았을까 물론 그후 안되는거 알고 딴길로틀고
-
비재원생은 못보나요??
-
물리1 지구과학1 4,5등급만 받으면 되는데 모할까? 2
문과출신 이미 대학 졸업장있는 틀딱임..ㅋㅋㅋ 과학포함하면 3합9 인 거 있어서...
-
진짜 접어야지
-
신입부원 한정으로 주2회 필참 이런것도 군기임?
-
친척들에게 극딜당하러 가는 날
-
울부모님은 사촌들한테 칭찬만 하는데 ㅈㄴ 불공평하네
-
75점 쳐박았노 20 25 29는 대체 왜 틀려있는거노???????이씨발....
-
오늘 로또 되고 대학도 수시가 럭키비키하게 붙어서 숨 좀 쉬었으면 좋겠다
-
어떻게 풀어요?
-
미분극한쪽보다 체감난이도 두배이상 높은듯 ㅅㅂ
-
강사 추천이나 교재추천부탁드려요 노베가시작할때하면좋은
-
이거 땜에 멘탈갈려서 시험지 다 날림..
-
익숙해지면 무덤덤한데 갑자기 없어지면 고통스럽다.
선지들 촘촘하네요 ㄷㄷ