📰 Fix the way science is published to avoid abuse and deception

Make all search data public. Declare in advance what the research objectives are. Above all, they stopped evaluating the importance of the research on the basis of the “impact factor” of the journal that published it. These are three of the possible solutions that have been put forward in the past a necklace (The contract is equal to ten years. The term is derived from the Latin words decim “ten”…) To combat an annoying problem: the big problem number (The notion of number in linguistics is addressed in the article “Number …) Research that other researchers have failed to replicate.

We’re starting to hear about “crisis cloning (The possibility of reproducibility of a scientific experiment is one of the conditions that make it possible to include …)in 2011 in psychology: On the one hand, a Research (Scientific research identifies in the first place all actions taken with a view to …) Explain how easy it was for Researcher (Researcher (researcher) refers to a person whose job it is to conduct research…) In this discipline to find “false positives”, ie data (In information technology (IT), data is an initial description, often…) who “prove” him that he is right; On the other hand, there was a file debate (A discussion is a (constructive) discussion on a specific or substantive topic, announced in advance, …) pungent About (Autour is the name you give the naming of birds in French (updated)…) From a 1996 “classic” experiment, it has been cited over 2,000 times since then, but has never been reproduced.

By the word ‘clone’, we are referring to a fact Basic (In music, the word primary can have several meanings.) For scientific progress for several centuries: to be accepted, a “discovery” must be able to be reproduced by other researchers. In other words, one search for a “revolutionary” claim is not enough.

But The idea of ​​a reproductive crisis he won Specialties other than psychology. Studies on feed (Nutrition (from the Latin nutrient: to nurture) defines the processes by which an organism …) Thus they have lost a lot of their luster in the past decade, A lot of them Looks tailored to grab the audience’s attention and The media (We call mass media a non-personal means of disseminating information (eg press, radio, etc.)At the expense of their scientific qualities.

Finally, although it has long been suspected that much of the so-called “primary” biomedical research has not led to promising breakthroughs when we delve deeper, The size of the problem Amazed, says a journalist (A journalist is a person whose professional activity is journalism. We are talking…) The new world: In 2011 study internal (In France, this name denotes a doctor, pharmacist or dental surgeon, in …) from Bayer thirds The results, which the company followed from university research, were unsuccessful. In 2012, Amgen added that out of 53 studies deemed significant, 5 only can be reproduced. This is partly why, in the past decade, science journalists have started striking out more often, so one must be very careful before writing a report on a study that “only” relates to the mouse (The term mouse is an obscure generic name that could be assigned to French speakers before…). or even worse, before going up Its results are “encouraging”.

The last factor: the pressure placed on researchers by the university and donor system to publish as much as possible – the famous “publish or die”. For example, there has long been a bias towards “positive” results, because researchers whose studies yielded negative results would be less inclined to accept weather (Time is a concept developed by humans to understand…) to write the article. We have long complained of the temptation that some magazines are forced to highlight certain titles to attract more attention. One possible solution: force “Pre-registrationResearch, which would oblige researchers to describe their hypotheses and objectives, which would prevent them from changing them in the context of road (The word “road” is derived from the Latin (via) rupta, which literally means “the way…)to meet the criteria of some reviews.

Another possible solution: stop giving so much importance, in researchers’ ratings, to journals’ “impact factor” – that is, publishing in a journal with a high impact factor gives more “points” for career advancement, increasing the temptation to Publish research on more ‘attractive’ topics“.

The “pre-registration” approach is particularly encouraged by Network (A computer network is a group of equipment linked together to exchange information…) cloninga British organization whose mission is to propose reforms to the way business is done scientific (A scientist is a person who devote himself to the study of science or science and who …). Al-Fath Center Science (Science (Latin science, “knowledge”) is, according to the dictionary…), a US organization, offers a “ranking” to identify searches that have been “pre-recorded”, and another to those whose researchers have agreed to share all of their data. The National Institutes of Health, the largest research funding agency in health (Health is a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being, and is not…) in the United States of America, It will be imposed next year That all recipients share their data.

In the recent report from new worldScience journalist Claire Wilson concludes that everyone involved in these reforms seems to agree that progress has been made in responding to the “red flags” heard over the past decade. “Almost everyone said it was a good start – but there’s still a long way to go.”