• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

一种用于确定科学观点和共识程度的新方法的开发。

Development of a novel methodology for ascertaining scientific opinion and extent of agreement.

作者信息

Vickers Peter, Adamo Ludovica, Alfano Mark, Clark Cory, Cresto Eleonora, Cui He, Dang Haixin, Dellsén Finnur, Dupin Nathalie, Gradowski Laura, Graf Simon, Guevara Aline, Hallap Mark, Hamilton Jesse, Hardey Mariann, Helm Paula, Landrum Asheley, Levy Neil, Machery Edouard, Mills Sarah, Muller Seán, Sheppard Joanne, N K Shinod, Slater Matthew, Stegenga Jacob, Strandin Henning, Stuart Michael T, Sweet David, Tasdan Ufuk, Taylor Henry, Towler Owen, Tulodziecki Dana, Tworek Heidi, Wallbank Rebecca, Wiltsche Harald, Mitchell Finnigan Samantha

机构信息

Department of Philosophy, University of Durham, Durham, United Kingdom.

School of Philosophy, Religion and History of Science, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2024 Dec 6;19(12):e0313541. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0313541. eCollection 2024.

DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0313541
PMID:39642116
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11623554/
Abstract

We take up the challenge of developing an international network with capacity to survey the world's scientists on an ongoing basis, providing rich datasets regarding the opinions of scientists and scientific sub-communities, both at a time and also over time. The novel methodology employed sees local coordinators, at each institution in the network, sending survey invitation emails internally to scientists at their home institution. The emails link to a '10 second survey', where the participant is presented with a single statement to consider, and a standard five-point Likert scale. In June 2023, a group of 30 philosophers and social scientists invited 20,085 scientists across 30 institutions in 12 countries to participate, gathering 6,807 responses to the statement Science has put it beyond reasonable doubt that COVID-19 is caused by a virus. The study demonstrates that it is possible to establish a global network to quickly ascertain scientific opinion on a large international scale, with high response rate, low opt-out rate, and in a way that allows for significant (perhaps indefinite) repeatability. Measuring scientific opinion in this new way would be a valuable complement to currently available approaches, potentially informing policy decisions and public understanding across diverse fields.

摘要

我们接受了一项挑战,即建立一个能够持续对全球科学家进行调查的国际网络,提供有关科学家和科学子群体观点的丰富数据集,包括某个时间点以及随时间变化的数据。所采用的新颖方法是,网络中的每个机构的本地协调员在其所在机构内部向科学家发送调查邀请电子邮件。这些电子邮件链接到一个“10秒调查”,参与者会看到一条要考虑的单一陈述以及标准的五点李克特量表。2023年6月,一组30名哲学家和社会科学家邀请了12个国家30个机构的20,085名科学家参与,收集到了6,807份对“科学已经毫无疑问地证明COVID-19是由一种病毒引起的”这一陈述的回复。该研究表明,有可能建立一个全球网络,以高回复率、低退出率且允许显著(或许是无限期)重复性的方式,在大规模国际范围内快速确定科学观点。以这种新方式衡量科学观点将是对现有方法的宝贵补充,可能为不同领域的政策决策和公众理解提供信息。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8bd1/11623554/79b29ab02f02/pone.0313541.g010.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8bd1/11623554/c2d10001487d/pone.0313541.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8bd1/11623554/7e2ffaa43e6d/pone.0313541.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8bd1/11623554/5c66912ca9ef/pone.0313541.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8bd1/11623554/76439c1d3a70/pone.0313541.g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8bd1/11623554/22d8bd96b719/pone.0313541.g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8bd1/11623554/a50670f45b2f/pone.0313541.g006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8bd1/11623554/386947874652/pone.0313541.g007.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8bd1/11623554/4475bcb73d5e/pone.0313541.g008.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8bd1/11623554/cfe05e439176/pone.0313541.g009.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8bd1/11623554/79b29ab02f02/pone.0313541.g010.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8bd1/11623554/c2d10001487d/pone.0313541.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8bd1/11623554/7e2ffaa43e6d/pone.0313541.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8bd1/11623554/5c66912ca9ef/pone.0313541.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8bd1/11623554/76439c1d3a70/pone.0313541.g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8bd1/11623554/22d8bd96b719/pone.0313541.g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8bd1/11623554/a50670f45b2f/pone.0313541.g006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8bd1/11623554/386947874652/pone.0313541.g007.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8bd1/11623554/4475bcb73d5e/pone.0313541.g008.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8bd1/11623554/cfe05e439176/pone.0313541.g009.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8bd1/11623554/79b29ab02f02/pone.0313541.g010.jpg

相似文献

1
Development of a novel methodology for ascertaining scientific opinion and extent of agreement.一种用于确定科学观点和共识程度的新方法的开发。
PLoS One. 2024 Dec 6;19(12):e0313541. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0313541. eCollection 2024.
2
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.在流行地区,服用抗叶酸抗疟药物的人群中,叶酸补充剂与疟疾易感性和严重程度的关系。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217.
3
Macromolecular crowding: chemistry and physics meet biology (Ascona, Switzerland, 10-14 June 2012).大分子拥挤现象:化学与物理邂逅生物学(瑞士阿斯科纳,2012年6月10日至14日)
Phys Biol. 2013 Aug;10(4):040301. doi: 10.1088/1478-3975/10/4/040301. Epub 2013 Aug 2.
4
Scientists' opinions and attitudes towards citizens' understanding of science and their role in public engagement activities.科学家对公民理解科学的程度及其在公众参与活动中的作用的看法和态度。
PLoS One. 2019 Nov 13;14(11):e0224262. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0224262. eCollection 2019.
5
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
6
Public perceptions of scientific advice: toward a science savvy public culture?公众对科学建议的看法:走向有科学素养的公众文化?
Public Health. 2021 May;194:86-88. doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2021.02.007. Epub 2021 Apr 16.
7
A Cross-sectional Survey of Public Knowledge and Perspective on Coronavirus Disease, Vaccination, and Related Research in India during the COVID-19 Pandemic.印度 COVID-19 大流行期间对冠状病毒病、疫苗接种和相关研究的公众知识和观点的横断面调查。
J Assoc Physicians India. 2023 Sep;71(9):19-27. doi: 10.59556/japi.71.0335.
8
Narratives and opinion polarization: a survey experiment.叙事与观点极化:一项调查实验。
Sci Rep. 2024 Aug 26;14(1):19732. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-70012-6.
9
Safety and Efficacy of Imatinib for Hospitalized Adults with COVID-19: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.COVID-19 住院成人患者使用伊马替尼的安全性和疗效:一项随机对照试验研究方案的结构化总结。
Trials. 2020 Oct 28;21(1):897. doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-04819-9.
10
Early public adherence with and support for stay-at-home COVID-19 mitigation strategies despite adverse life impact: a transnational cross-sectional survey study in the United States and Australia.尽管对生活产生了不利影响,公众仍早期坚持并支持 COVID-19 居家缓解策略:一项针对美国和澳大利亚的跨国横断面调查研究。
BMC Public Health. 2021 Mar 15;21(1):503. doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-10410-x.

本文引用的文献

1
Researchers on research integrity: a survey of European and American researchers.研究诚信研究人员:欧美研究人员的调查。
F1000Res. 2023 Feb 16;12:187. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.128733.1. eCollection 2023.
2
Did people really drink bleach to prevent COVID-19? A guide for protecting survey data against problematic respondents.人们真的喝漂白剂来预防 COVID-19 吗?保护调查数据免受问题受访者影响的指南。
PLoS One. 2023 Jul 5;18(7):e0287837. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0287837. eCollection 2023.
3
Aesthetic experiences and flourishing in science: A four-country study.
美学体验与科学的蓬勃发展:一项四国研究。
Front Psychol. 2022 Aug 9;13:923940. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.923940. eCollection 2022.
4
Communicating doctors' consensus persistently increases COVID-19 vaccinations.持续沟通医生的共识可提高 COVID-19 疫苗接种率。
Nature. 2022 Jun;606(7914):542-549. doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-04805-y. Epub 2022 Jun 1.
5
Estimating the success of re-identifications in incomplete datasets using generative models.利用生成模型估计不完全数据集重识别的成功率。
Nat Commun. 2019 Jul 23;10(1):3069. doi: 10.1038/s41467-019-10933-3.
6
Changes in perceived scientific consensus shift beliefs about climate change and GM food safety.人们对科学共识的看法变化会改变他们对气候变化和转基因食品安全的看法。
PLoS One. 2018 Jul 6;13(7):e0200295. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0200295. eCollection 2018.
7
Examining the Gap between Science and Public Opinion about Genetically Modified Food and Global Warming.审视科学与公众对转基因食品和全球变暖的看法之间的差距。
PLoS One. 2016 Nov 9;11(11):e0166140. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0166140. eCollection 2016.
8
Using the Delphi expert consensus method in mental health research.在心理健康研究中运用德尔菲专家共识法。
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2015 Oct;49(10):887-97. doi: 10.1177/0004867415600891. Epub 2015 Aug 21.
9
The scientific consensus on climate change as a gateway belief: experimental evidence.关于气候变化作为一种入门信念的科学共识:实验证据。
PLoS One. 2015 Feb 25;10(2):e0118489. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0118489. eCollection 2015.
10
Processing idiomatic expressions: effects of semantic compositionality.处理习语表达:语义组合性的影响
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2008 Mar;34(2):313-27. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.34.2.313.