SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The scientific process, in its ideal form, is elegant: Ask a question, set up an objective test, and get an answer. Repeat. Science is rarely practiced to that ideal. But Copernicus believed in that ideal. So did the rocket scientists behind the moon landing.
But nowadays, our respondents told us, the process is riddled with conflict. Scientists say they're forced to prioritize self-preservation over pursuing the best questions and uncovering meaningful truths.
Today, scientists' success often isn't measured by the quality of their questions or the rigor of their methods. It's instead measured by how much grant money they win, the number of studies they publish, and how they spin their findings to appeal to the public.
Scientists often learn more from studies that fail. But failed studies can mean career death. So instead, they're incentivized to generate positive results they can publish. And the phrase "publish or perish" hangs over nearly every decision. It's a nagging whisper, like a Jedi's path to the dark side.
"Over time the most successful people will be those who can best exploit the system," Paul Smaldino, a cognitive science professor at University of California Merced, says.
Many scientists have had enough. They want to break this cycle of perverse incentives and rewards. They are going through a period of introspection, hopeful that the end result will yield stronger scientific institutions. In our survey and interviews, they offered a wide variety of ideas for improving the scientific process and bringing it closer to its ideal form.
Before we jump in, some caveats to keep in mind: Our survey was not a scientific poll. For one, the respondents disproportionately hailed from the biomedical and social sciences and English-speaking communities.
Many of the responses did, however, vividly illustrate the challenges and perverse incentives that scientists across fields face. And they are a valuable starting point for a deeper look at dysfunction in science today.
The 7 problems identified are:
1) Academia has a huge money problem
2) Too many studies are poorly designed
3) Replicating results is crucial — and rare
4) Peer review is broken
5) Too much science is locked behind paywalls
6) Science is poorly communicated
7) Life as a young academic is incredibly stressful
It seems to me, that, much of this is already known to most scientists. However, this cycle of publish or perish continues unabated. What do you think should be done to change this mindset ?
http://www.vox.com/2016/7/14/12016710/science-challeges-research-funding-peer-review-process
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Ethanol-fueled on Monday July 18 2016, @03:08AM
I can't address all of this, but I can address some:
Yeah, all the money goes to the greedy politically-appointed regents and overpaid bullshit "diversity officers" rather than to those who do the actual science.
Academics are remarkably poor communicators. When you're Aspie enough to get balls-deep into academia, some of your basic skills suffer.
Well, no shit. Instead of paying decent stipends and living quarters, government would rather pay for illegal Mexicans' welfare and the 8 illegitimate babies of each illegal Mexican family so Democrats can get more votes. And overwhelmingly Democratic-voting academics wonder why the rest of us think they're idiots.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Zz9zZ on Monday July 18 2016, @03:30AM
... government would rather pay for illegal Mexicans' welfare...
You do realize that isn't possible right? Only citizens can get welfare, illegals generally have no access to services and pay their own way. ER visits are about the only thing they can get access to.
Would you care to share why you are so angry about illegal immigrants? You've professed to be descended from some minority, what are the things that have gotten you so upset? Or have you just been inundated by the personal opinions of those around you and take them as fact?
Many people base their opinions on partial truths, liberals and conservatives. Often the truth is somewhere in the middle. So again, why are you so extreme? I just can't see it being 100% trolling.
~Tilting at windmills~
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 18 2016, @07:43PM
Often the truth is somewhere in the middle.
It's hard to determine where the "middle" is. Personally, I don't really care, as I only care about what is actually correct, not how "extreme" it is. Telling people that the truth is often in the "middle" is utterly useless for the conversation and is unlikely to convince anyone of anything.
So again, why are you so extreme?
How "extreme" something is (which is subjective) has nothing to do with how true it is. Accusations of extremism are often just used to poison the well and shut down conversation. Respond to someone's arguments; the bits about "extremism" are nothing but filler at best, and a logical fallacy at worst.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 18 2016, @03:33AM
*I* am entitled to a comfortable lifestyle because I would be really productive if the system wasn't all fucked up.
However *those people* need to be shipped out of the country ASAP.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Ethanol-fueled on Monday July 18 2016, @03:45AM
While I do believe illegals should be deported immediately, when did I say I was entitled to anything? This isn't about me, it's about resource allocation and my belief that, despite academics being Aspies and liberal idiots, should get more resources to do good science (because it needs to be done and nobody else wants to do it).
And as far as getting them more resources and incentive to do science, it wouldn't hypothetically just come from money saved from kicking out the illegals -- it would also comes from a sanity-check on the million-dollar salaries of greedy politically-appointed regents and the elimination of overpaid busywork roles for minorities for the sole sake of employing token minorities.
Does that offend you? Well, life ain't politically correct.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 18 2016, @04:49AM
(((Ethanol-fueled))), again. Now if ever there was an anti-argument for Big-Science and the Military Industrial Complex, Eth is it. Works in the "defense industry", raised in PX's around the world, horrible racist and sexist, the first person we should go to when formulating the course of science, industry, and the arts for all of humanity. Too bad he's Nazi. Just saying. Viva le Trump!!
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Zz9zZ on Monday July 18 2016, @05:32AM
Since you won't respond to my questions I'll just hop on this comment train :P Illegals don't cost the US much of anything, being illegal they don't get access to many services, especially not welfare.
The only decent point you have is that ridiculous salaries for bureaucrats should be eliminated, and I would add that follows across the board for all professions.
Now, as for life not being politically correct, it is pretty clear that we've swung too far towards thought crimes with the PC movement, but I would rather deal with an overly sensitive weirdo than a potentially violent and rude asshole. You are just the opposite end of the spectrum from the PC folks, and it is ironic that you undoubtedly wear that as a badge of pride.
~Tilting at windmills~