was defined as publishing a lot of novel findings,
cheap jordans online
, labs succeeded when they did science that was “low effort” — sloppy and probably irreproducible. Research groups doing high-effort, careful science didn’t publish enough. And they went the way of the dinosaurs.
Even putting an emphasis on replication — in which labs got half credit for double-checking the findings of other groups — couldn’t save the system. “That was a surprise for us,” Smaldino says. He assumed that if the low-effort labs got caught by failures to replicate,
cheap retro jordans
, their success would go down. But scientists can’t replicate every single study,
cheap real jordans
, and in the simulation,
cheap wholesale jordans
, the lazy labs still thrived. “The most successful are still going to low effort,” he explains, “because not everyone gets caught.” Smaldino and McElreath published their findings September 21 in Royal Society Open Science.
“I think the results they get are probably reasonable,
cheap jordan shoes
,” says John Ioannidis, a methods researcher at Stanford University in California. “Once you have bad practices they can propagate and ruin the scientific process and become dominant. And I think there’s some truth to it,
cheap Authentic jordans
, unfortunately.”
The publish-or-perish culture may be having negative consequences already, Edwards says. “I’ve … seen ethical researchers leave academia,
cheap air jordans
, not enter in the first place or become unethical,” he says. Scientists might slice their research findings thinner,
cheap jordans for sale
, trying to publish more findings with less data, breaking experiments down to the least publishable unit. That in itself is not unethical, but Edwards worries the

http://www.bcc.aaf.pl/...hread.php?thread_id=16728

http://siemprelucenacf...p;view=article&id=115

http://www.efti.org/es/search/node/