문제 퀄 평가좀
게시글 주소: https://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.
-
에피츄가 수능 성적 상위 0.1퍼 인증하는 것 같던데 0.1퍼면 무조건 서울대 or...
-
고2 올라가면서 살지 말지 고민되네요
-
피드백 수용하시는 속도가 진짜 빠르시네 인현강 차별을 완전히 없앨 수는 없지만...
-
군수하는 사람인데요 오전 8시에일어나서 밥 먹고 점심 먹으면 12시인데 담배한대...
-
가끔 헷갈리거나 이해를 못할 단어가 등장하는데, 자주 나오는 단어가 있을까요?
-
수학 과탐은 걍 아무생각없이 풀어도 되던데 국어는 아무생각없으면 ㅈ되는듯
-
생각해보니까 공부하면서 는다고 한적 단 한번도 없는거 같은데 실제로 대학은 세급간...
-
와 덥다 3
날씨가 이게 맞나?
-
정원대비 티오가 좋고 본34 서울실습이 장점이라 들었는데(수도권 사람임) 다른...
-
흠냐뇨이..
-
키타 5
이쿠요
-
국어 > [리트 전개년 기출 언어이해] 2009 23~25 > [리트 전개년 기출...
-
ㅈㄱㄴ
-
이거 다 외워야 하나요??
-
순한줄 알았지? 맛 서바
-
순한맛 서바
-
교재 왔따 3
-
??
-
사회문화 질문 3
노동조합은 평소 공식조직으로 들어가는걸로 아는데 문제 발문에 사내 노동조합이라고...
-
인논으로 대학 합격하신 분 계시나요… 경쟁률 보고 진짜 도저히 희망이 없는 것 같고...
선지들 촘촘하네요 ㄷㄷ