3 ms·
This would end up being counterproductive as the small minority of papers removed this way for a good reason would not make up for a vast number of scholars bei
by Bakary 9y ago
This would end up being counterproductive as the small minority of papers removed this way for a good reason would not make up for a vast number of scholars being alienated and distracted from their work due to the intrusive investigations. Even without that loss of productivity it's still unclear whether allocating resources to this monitoring would be cost-effective.
- crawfordcomeaux 9y agoThe purpose isn't to remove papers. It's to help guide and reproduce experiments. What if we can only reproduce certain desirable results when researchers feel a certain way? This is too important to simply dismiss out of fear. Science needs more courage, not less.
- AstralStorm 9y agoHow do you ensure the validity of such questionnaire? Sociology and psychology have enough problems without tossing a recursive one on top. Moreover, make sure to verify the hypothesis that mental state is important to scientific reproducibility.
- crawfordcomeaux 9y agoScience will necessarily become slightly more subjective than it is. Things have become way too objective, to the point of denying emotions play a vital part in all we do. The validity is up to the researcher to provide & will need to be done in as emotionally "safe" way/place as possible if we don't want to risk training scientists to deny their emotions to the point of separating their biological responses from their emotions. That'd be a disaster. This tech introduces all kinds of dangerous potential effects, so anyone working on or with it will need to take extra care.