2. 职称英语
  3. Rarely does it get much more ironic. Marc Hauser,a professor of psychology a

Rarely does it get much more ironic. Marc Hauser,a professor of psychology a

游客2024-12-16  14
问题     Rarely does it get much more ironic. Marc Hauser,a professor of psychology at Harvard who made his name probing the evolutionary origins of morality, is suspected of having committed the closest thing academia has to a deadly sin: cheating. It is not the first time the scientific world has been rocked by scandal. But the present furore,involving as it does a prestigious university and one of its star professors, will echo through common rooms and quadrangles far and wide.
    The story broke when the Boston Globe revealed that Dr. Hauser had been under investigation since 2007 for alleged misconduct at Harvard’s Cognitive Evolution Laboratory, which he heads. This investigation has resulted in the retraction of an oft-cited study published in 2002 in Cognition, the publication last month of a correction to a paper from 2007 in the Proceedings of the Royal Society, and doubts about the validity of findings published in Science, also in 2007. Dr. Hauser was the only author common to all three papers.
    An article in the Chronicle of Higher Education added further spice. It offered unsettling accounts by anonymous graduate students and research assistants depicting Dr. Hauser as brusquely dismissive of their attempts to discuss possible improprieties in data collection and interpretation.
    This prompted Michael Smith,the hitherto taciturn dean of Harvard’s Faculty of Arts and Sciences, to react. In an open letter to the faculty,he confirmed that an internal investigation had found Dr. Hauser "solely responsible" for eight instances of scientific misconduct, involving the three published papers and five other pieces of research. On the same day,Dr. Hauser, who is on leave and refusing to be interviewed, issued a single contrite statement apologising for having made some "significant mistakes".
    These would not be his first. So far, none of this constitutes conclusive evidence of fraud. Slapdash lab work is not the same as fabricating data and Harvard has kept mum about the precise nature of the charges, citing concerns about privacy. Many researchers, however, fear that this silence itself makes things worse and not just for Dr. Hauser and Harvard. The uncertainty about which of his results(for he has been a prolific researcher)are up to snuff means others in the field are finding it hard to decide what to rely on in their own work. And despite Dr. Hauser’s professed sole responsibility,a sizeable number of his present and former wards may unfairly be tainted by association.
    At the least, then, Dr. Hauser stands accused of setting the study of animal cognition back many years. Trying to discern an animal’s thought processes on the basis of its behaviour is notoriously tricky and subjective at the best of times. Now,his critics fear,no one will take it seriously. As Greg Laden,one of Dr. Hauser’s former colleagues, laments in a blog,"the hubris and selfishness of one person can do more in the form of damage than an entire productive career can do in the way of building of our collective credibility. "
    Others are less depressed, warning against conflating scientific misconduct with difficult science. One corner-cutting researcher does not impugn a whole field. Clive Wynne, editor of Behavioural Processes, which published an "obsessively" immaculate paper by Dr. Hauser three days before the Globe’s revelations,says he is struck by how meticulous recent research in his discipline has been.
    In general,scientists see themselves better placed than most to weed out cheats. The more startling a paper’s claims, the more likely it is that others will try to replicate it and, if the claims were plausible, fail. Moreover,scientists want their work to be replicated; it is the only way it will stand the test of time, observes Robert Seyfarth,a primatologist and Dr. Mauser’s former mentor.
    Many researchers cite Harvard’s probe as further proof of science’s self-correcting mechanisms, and praise students for doughtily standing up to an authority figure of Dr. Hauser’s distinction. Gerry Altmann, editor of Cognition, agrees, adding: "Although at the time it might appear that each transgression is major,its eventual impact on science is minor. " [br] The phrase "up to snuff" in Paragraph 5 probably means______for a particular purpose.
选项 A、good enough
B、available
C、reasonable
D、plausible
答案 A
解析 语义题。根据题干定位至第五段倒数第二句。由prolific(多产的)researcher和finding it hard to decide what to rely on in their own work可以推断，因为Dr．Hauser的研究成果颇丰，研究人员通常在自己的研究工作中会参照Hauser的研究方法和结果，因此造假事件对他们的影响很大。由此可以推断The uncertainty…are up to snuff意为“不确定他的研究结果中哪些是精确的”，这和后面的“很难确定在自己的工作中应该去相信哪些实验结果”相呼应关系，故[A]为答案。available意为“可得到的”，只要是出版的研究成果无论是真实的还是虚伪的，都是available，这与后面的文意不符，排除[B]；reasonable意为“合理的”，这与本文谈论的学术造假没有必然联系，与本句后面的内容也没有直接关系，排除[C]；plausible意为“似是而非的”，强调的是表面看起来是真实的，但此处涉及的或者是真实的研究成果或者是虚假的结果，跟表面看起来如何无关，排除[D]。
转载请注明原文地址:https://www.tihaiku.com/zcyy/3877168.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)