2. 职称英语
  3. Jan Hendrik Schon’s success seemed too good to be true, and it was. In only

Jan Hendrik Schon’s success seemed too good to be true, and it was. In only

游客2025-01-19  11
问题     Jan Hendrik Schon’s success seemed too good to be true, and it was. In only four years as a physicist at Bell Laboratories, Schon, 32, had co-authored 90 scientific papers—one every 16 days-detailing new discoveries in superconductivity, lasers, nanotechnology and quantum physics. This output astonished his colleagues, and made them suspicious. When one co-worker noticed that the same table of data appeared in two separate papers—which also happened to appear in the two most prestigious scientific journals in the world, Science and Nature—the jig was up. In October 2002, a Bell Labs investigation found that Schon had falsified and fabricated data. His career as a scientist was finished. Scientific scandals, which are as old as science itself, tend to follow similar patterns of due reward.
    In recent years, of course, the pressure on scientists to publish in the top journals has increased, making the journals much more crucial to career success. The questions are whether Nature and Science have become too powerful as arbiters of what science reaches to the public, and whether the journals are up to their task as gatekeepers.
    Each scientific specialty has its own set of journals. Physicists have Physical Review Letters, neuroscientists have Neuron, and so forth. Science and Nature, though, are the only two major journals that cover the gamut of scientific disciplines, from meteorology and zoology to quantum physics and chemistry. As a result, journalists look to them each week for the cream of the crop of new science papers. And scientists look to the journals in part to reach journalists. Why do they care? Competition for grants has gotten so fierce that scientists have sought popular renown to gain an edge over their rivals. Publication in specialized journals will win the acclaims from academics and satisfy the publish-or-perish imperative, but Science and Nature come with the added bonus of potentially getting your paper written up in The New York Times and other publications.
    Scientists tend to pay more attention to the big two than to other journals. When more scientists know about a particular paper, they’re more apt to cite it in their own papers. Being oft-cited will increase a scientist’s "Impact Factor", a measure of how often papers are cited by peers. Funding agencies use the "Impact Factor" as a rough measure of the influence of scientists they’re considering supporting. [br] To find out why scientific scandals like Schon’s occur, people have begun to raise doubts about the two top journals for________.
选项 A、their academic prestige
B、their importance to career success
C、their popularity with scientific circles
D、their reviewing system
答案 A
解析 题目问随着科学界丑闻的增加，人们开始对《科学》和《自然》这两个顶级期刊的哪方面产生了质疑，由第2段连续两个反问句(The questions are whether…too powerful as arbiters…and whether…are up to their task as gatekeepers)可看出，人们开始质疑的是这两大期刊的“绝对权威性”，因此A项最合适。B项“期刊对职业成功的重要性”，由第2段首句和第3段的相关论述可看出，这两大顶级期刊对科学家们事业成功的重要性是毫无疑问的，因此排除B项。C项“他们在科学界的受欢迎度”，同样可由第3段的相关论述看出这是无须质疑的，因此排除C项。D项“他们的审查体系”在文中并未被提及，也可排除。
转载请注明原文地址:https://www.tihaiku.com/zcyy/3919093.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)