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.
-
신혁이가 좋다 3
좋아
-
재수생 중에 수능 접수 놓쳐서 수능 못본 사람 있으려나 5
갑자기 불안해지네 접수 잘할수 있겠지? ㅋㅋ
-
검색해봣는데 뭔가 바로 이해가 안되서 21학년도 수능부터 문이과 통합교육과정으로...
-
ㅇㅇ 반박시 고자
-
신경쓰지 않는다!!!!! 상관없다!!!!!!! 일단 지금으로서는 공부하면 되겠지
-
여기서 ㄱ번은 T + 알파(알파>0) 맞죠? 앞선 시각이라는게 원래 시각보다...
-
문학 특 5
행복한 사람은 문학을 쓰지 않는다 별것 아닌 것 같지만 문제 푸는 데 엄청 도움됨...
-
올해도 하려고 했는데 어차피 니 학교는 구하기 힘들거라 해서 그냥 수능 올인......
-
이감온 원래 구독하고 있어서 한달에 한번 오는데 저번주부터 국어 현강 다녀서 이감...
-
정식티 뭐라고 소신발언 하실지 궁금하네 (1타 뺏기먄)
-
제가 보이시나요 3
유령을보셧군요 아차차
-
문제 퀄 평가좀 3
--- Peer review is a cornerstone of scientific...
-
과자먹고싶다 2
시원한 캔맥 하나 까서 캬
-
경기 모 외고 졸업 03 초딩때부터 연고대 목표 2학년 때까지 내신 서성한 어문...
-
마트같은곳 갔을때 매일 초코파이나 오예스 등등 새로운버젼이 나오면 예를들어 오예스...
-
진짜 해도해도 안 올라서 물리 버리고 지구 사문 하려는데 진지하게 가는게 맞을까요?...
-
퀄리티 어때용?
-
수학현강에 킁킁이 빌런있음. 그냥 킁..이 아니고 진짜 우렁참 ㅈㄴ시끄러움.....
-
있긴 한가요?
선지들 촘촘하네요 ㄷㄷ