697 research outputs found

    How to deal with being “scooped”: the vast majority of science is a process of derivative, incremental advance

    Get PDF
    Researchers are under increasing pressure to deliver novel research findings and as such, it can be incredibly disheartening when another team publishes ahead of you on a similar topic. But is this competitive mentality true to the scientific process? Chris Chambers argues there are several positive sides to being “scooped” and by focusing on these positives, researchers can overcome the initial disappointment. Getting scooped is a sign that your research is important and that you are probably asking the right questions

    What's next for registered reports?

    Get PDF

    Efficiency analysis in the presence of uncertainty

    Get PDF
    In a stochastic decision environment, differences in information can lead rational decision makers facing the same stochastic technology and the same markets to make different production choices. Efficiency and productivity measurement in such a setting can be seriously and systematically biased by the manner in which the stochastic technology is represented. For example, conventional production frontiers implicitly impose the restriction that information differences have no effect on the way risk-neutral decision makers utilize the same input bundle. The result is that rational and efficient ex ante production choices can be mistakenly characterized as inefficient -- informational differences are mistaken for differences in technical efficiency. This paper uses simulation methods to illustrate the type and magnitude of empirical errors that can emerge in efficiency analysis as a result of overly restrictive representations of production technologies.

    Constitutional Revolution: A Path Towards Equitable Representation

    Get PDF

    Retaining Diversity in the Classroom: Strategies for Maximizing the Benefits that Flow from a Diverse Student Body

    Get PDF
    In Grutter v. Bollinger, the United States Supreme Court addressed the issue of whether diversity is a sufficiently compelling government interest to justify an affirmative action program that considered race and ethnicity in allocating law school admission offers. The Court determined that diversity was a compelling interest, resolving the conflict in the federal circuits on that issue. In this article, Goodman argues that the courts must examine the tightness of the fit between the goal of either achieving diversity or of realizing the benefits that flow from a diverse student body, and the means used to try to accomplish either of these particular goals. In Part II of this article, Goodman contends that diversity, and the benefits that flow from that diversity, are worth pursuing now that its stature as a compelling interest continues to hold a majority of the United States Supreme Court. Recognizing the critiques of the diversity rationale, as provided by other scholars, Part II also summarizes and responds to some of those critiques. Part III of this article presents concrete strategies for faculty to use in the classroom to help maximize the benefits of any existing diversity, to help retain that existing diversity, and to promote a higher appreciation of diversity within a law school community. Goodman concludes the article with a call to action to maximize these benefits of diversity before the doors to access shut further
    • …
    corecore