high stakes places scientists on the edge of a slippery slope, from least publishable units to sliced-and-diced datasets. “With the wrong incentives you can make anyone behave unethically, and academia is no different.”
Using a theoretical model of his own, Edwards and his colleague Siddhartha Roy show that, at some point,
cheap jordans online
, the current academic system could lead a critical mass of scientists to cross the line to unethical behavior,
cheap retro jordans
, corrupting the scientific enterprise and losing the public’s trust. “If we ever reach this tipping point where our institutions become inherently corrupt, it will have devastating consequences for humanity,
cheap real jordans
,” Edwards says. “The fate of the world depends as never before on good trustworthy science to solve our problems. Will we be there?” Edwards and Roy report their model September 22 in Environmental Engineering Science.
To stay away from the slippery slope, scientists will need to change what scientific success looks like. Here’s the rub,
cheap jordans free shipping
, though. Scientists are the primary people watching scientists work. When papers go through peer review at scientific journals,
http://cheapjordansstock.com
, ideas get examined in peer-review committees for grant funding or a scientist is being considered for an academic job,
cheap Authentic jordans
, it’s other scientists who are guarding those gates to scientific success. A single scientist might be publishing papers, peer-reviewing other peoples’ papers,
cheap jordan shoes
, submitting grants, serving on review committees for other peoples’ grants, editing a journal,
cheap jordans
, applying for a job and serving on a hiring committee — all at the same time. And so the

http://forum.laufdesle...Thread&threadID=68048

http://www.civilservic...ub3Rlcy5jb20vaW5kZXgucGhw

http://www.garteninsel...ion=com_content&id=56