7 Matching Annotations
- May 2024
-
docdrop.org docdrop.org
-
In his renowned essay,“Battle of the Books” (1698), Jonathan Swift celebrated these texts asmore excellent than moderns realized—and he bequeathed a phraseto describe the honey of the ancients that Matthew Arnold wouldlater make infamous: “sweetness and light.”
note the "honey of the ancients" description here with a tangential nod to the commonplace tradition
see: <br /> - https://hypothes.is/a/mCsl9voQEeuP3t8jNOyAvw<br /> - https://hypothes.is/users/chrisaldrich?q=tag%3A%22jonathan+swift%22+tag%3A%22commonplace+books%22
-
- Jun 2022
-
www.youtube.com www.youtube.com
- May 2015
-
journals.plos.org journals.plos.org
-
The estimate that 85% of research is wasted referred only to activities prior to the point of publication. Much waste clearly occurs after publication: from poor access, poor dissemination, and poor uptake of the findings of research.
Good quote
Tags
Annotators
URL
-
-
www.newyorker.com www.newyorker.com
-
It’d be really great if the initial studies gave us an accurate summary of things. But they don’t. And so what happens is we waste a lot of money treating millions of patients and doing lots of follow-up studies on other themes based on results that are misleading.”
Need to be able to reference these statements
-
For Simmons, the steep rise and slow fall of fluctuating asymmetry is a clear example of a scientific paradigm, one of those intellectual fads that both guide and constrain research: after a new paradigm is proposed, the peer-review process is tilted toward positive results. But then, after a few years, the academic incentives shift—the paradigm has become entrenched—so that the most notable results are now those that disprove the theory.
Interesting, but again points to a real need to accelerate this process.
-
-
lifescivc.com lifescivc.com
-
Given the idiosyncrasies of lab practices, that’s a concentrated risk profile. Wait for more labs to repeat the work, or conduct a full lab notebook audit
Full lab notebook audit
-
Academic investigator’s directly or indirectly pressured their labs to publish sensational “best of all experimental” results rather than the average or typical study; The “special sauce” of the author’s lab – how the experiment was done, what serum was used, what specific cells were played with, etc.. – led to a local optimum of activity in the paper that can’t be replicated elsewhere and isn’t broadly applicable; or, Systemically ignoring contradictory data in order to support the lab’s hypothesis, often leading to discounting conflicting findings as technical or reagent failures.
Good material for the proposal
-