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.
-
언매 1컷 몇임?? 98 되려나
-
오늘 성적벋어보니까 국수 85 62로나옴;; 92 89인데
-
나는 왜 엽록체가 없는 것이야
-
ㅈㄴ개급함 제발빨리 ㅜㅜ
-
학교측이 의미없는 해결책을 내놓음에따라 연세대학교 자연계열 수리논술 재시험을 위한...
-
아기 일어났어요 3
다시 잔다
-
히히 3
똥발싸
-
화작확통생윤사문 3
32211로 중앙대쓸수있나요? 백분위 80 92 98 98
-
이젠 9평에 이어 10월 모의마저도 1컷이 50이 나오는 ㅋㅋ
-
하 ㅅㅂ 9모는 다시 풀어봤을때 28 30 손 못대는거 말고는 21번도 손은...
-
이비에스 만점마무리 봉투모의고사 국어 이거 퀄리티 괜찮나요?
-
???: 경찰 아저씨 지인으로 두면 나쁜 애들이 너 안 괴롭힐 거야 1
https://naver.me/GDarzFMR 하하하.... 저 나중에 경찰 되면...
-
깨어있어도 숨소리 ㅈㄴ 크네 폐에 구멍났나 왜 이렇게 후욱후욱 거림..... 저...
-
흠
-
마지막 문장 ‘미루나무 그늘 아래에서 7월은 더위를 잊은 채 깜빡 잠이 들었다.’...
-
고3 11모 1
학교에서 고3 11모 친다던데 사실인가여 저희만 치는건가요 11월 1일인가 뭐라하던데ㅔ
-
수학 실모 하루 1개면 충분한가?아님 더 해야되나? 공부량이 좀 적은가 싶음
-
한번쓰면 지울 수 없어서 무지성으로 써내려가게 되지않고 충분히 고민해본 뒤에 쓰게됨
-
연세대 논술 누가 더 몰래 잘 배끼나 따지는 전형인거죠? 1
재시험 안보면 그냥 쌤들한테 연락돌려서 몰래 배낀사람이 이길텐데 누가누가...
선지들 촘촘하네요 ㄷㄷ