• maegul (he/they)
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Also a PhD student! Also not going into academia.

    And yea, the moment I thought of the idea I had one of those rare feelings of thinking it obviously made sense, at least for the current system we have, where a PhD student is, often, at the beginning, not really qualified to be doing actual research, but the whole system is historically premised on that notion and kind of twists itself into keeping up that appearance (depending on where you are), which I think has plenty of negative knock on effects on the quality of science and researchers. Combining learning how to do research in science with the task of doing that research efficiently (ie publish or perish) is tricky and can get wonky.

    So … why not use replication, which the system, IMO, surely needs more of, as a way of teaching research while also doing some form of research that happens to be along slightly better trodden grounds while also emphasising, in a way better than a lot of attempts at “original research” IMO, the true essential process of science.

    I’ve got a feeling that such PhD work would actually produce better scientists (depending on the field and location).

    Hope your project goes well! Especially with the negative replication/verification result! I’ve heard stories about how that can be a pain to publish, depending on the details of course. Good luck!!

    • realChem@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree completely, especially about the negative knock-on effects on the quality of science overall. Making replications worthwhile for researchers to spend time and money on is certainly going to be a challenge that the institution of academia will need to figure out sooner or later (fingers crossed for sooner, but realistically probably later).

      Good luck with your PhD too! I hope it’s going well so far!