Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In Denmark, scientific misconduct is defined as "intention[al] negligence leading to fabrication of the scientific message or a false credit or emphasis given to a scientist", and in Sweden as "intention[al] distortion of the research process by fabrication of data, text, hypothesis, or methods from another researcher's manuscript form or ...
Research suggests that scientists are taught various heuristics and practices that allow their investigations to benefit, and not suffer, from accidents. [2] [8] First, careful control conditions allow scientists to properly identify something as "unexpected". Once a finding is recognized as legitimately unexpected and in need of explaining ...
Other research groups were not able to replicate the results and suggested that impurities in the material led to spurious effects mimicking phenomena associated with superconductivity. Copper(I) sulfide , a compound produced in the synthesis process, turned out to be a close match for the claimed properties of LK-99, and pure samples of LK-99 ...
The United Kingdom risks repeating the same tragic mistakes “again and again” as its coronavirus death toll continues to spiral, public health experts have warned. Senior experts in the U.K ...
Publication of studies on p-hacking and questionable research practices: Since the late 2000s, a number of studies in metascience showed how commonly adopted practices in many scientific fields, such as exploiting the flexibility of the process of data collection and reporting, could greatly increase the probability of false positive results.
Research suggests that the main cause of hindsight bias is that no investor can remember how they made their decisions at the time. Therefore, in order to invest more rationally and safely, investors should keep a diary of the influences, outcomes and show why those outcomes were achieved when making their investment decisions. [ 63 ]
A system to distinguish papers from "good" and "bad" would be beneficial to researchers. This system may save the reputation of scientists and researchers. Most researchers publish honest work and sometimes simple mistakes happen to be overlooked by the peer review process. Retraction should not be for simple spelling errors, but for inaccurate ...
A leak in 1972 led to cessation of the study and severe legal ramifications. It has been widely regarded as the "most infamous biomedical research study in U.S. history". [62] Because of the public outrage, in 1974 Congress passed the National Research Act, to provide for protection of human subjects in experiments. The National Commission for ...