July 27th, 2014

Nature's roundup of the papers and issues gaining traction on social media

Based on data from Altmetric.com. Altmetric is supported by Macmillan Science and Education, which owns Nature Publishing Group.

News that a rarified group of scientists has claimed the lion's share of publications has set off a social-media discussion about the fairness of the system. Researchers also took to Twitter to share their take on a controversial paper that posits a microbial view of religion.

An analysis led by John Ioannidis, a health-policy researcher at Stanford University, found that less than 1% of all researchers managed to publish every year from 1996 to 2011, but that those elite few were authors on more than 41% of all papers in the same period. Many noted the similarity between this and claims that the top 1% of US earners hold an inordinate share of the country's wealth. “Occupy!” tweeted Karen James, a geneticist at MDI Biological Laboratory in Maine, alluding to the Occupy Wall Street protest movement that calls for economic equality. Chris Cramer, a chemist at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis, tweeted that it was “an interesting example of the top 1% CONTRIBUTING 41% (instead of owning?).”

Collapse )

Неприятие научного знания

Специалисты всерьез обеспокоены растущим разрывом между прогрессом науки и отсталостью общественного сознания, прозябающего в плену невежества и предрассудков. Исследования последних лет выявили связь между неприятием определенных научных теорий взрослыми людьми и психологией маленьких детей. В частности, свойственная детям «неупорядоченная телеология» — склонность приписывать каждому предмету цель, ради которой он был кем-то сделан — является одной из причин удивительной живучести креационизма.

Collapse )