Judging quality in science. (Editorial)

The joint inspection report by Australia, Peru and the United Kingdom, presented at the last ATCM in Stockholm, contained an unusual recommendation. On the basis of the science that they had seen at the research stations the inspection team had concluded that there was both very good science and ver...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Antarctic Science
Main Author: Walton, David
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:unknown
Published: Cambridge University Press 2005
Subjects:
Online Access:http://nora.nerc.ac.uk/id/eprint/2042/
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954102005002993
id ftnerc:oai:nora.nerc.ac.uk:2042
record_format openpolar
spelling ftnerc:oai:nora.nerc.ac.uk:2042 2024-06-09T07:39:57+00:00 Judging quality in science. (Editorial) Walton, David 2005 http://nora.nerc.ac.uk/id/eprint/2042/ https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954102005002993 unknown Cambridge University Press Walton, David orcid:0000-0002-7103-4043 . 2005 Judging quality in science. (Editorial). Antarctic Science, 17 (4). 481. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954102005002993 <https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954102005002993> Science Policy Publication - Article NonPeerReviewed 2005 ftnerc https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954102005002993 2024-05-15T08:42:16Z The joint inspection report by Australia, Peru and the United Kingdom, presented at the last ATCM in Stockholm, contained an unusual recommendation. On the basis of the science that they had seen at the research stations the inspection team had concluded that there was both very good science and very poor science being undertaken. They apparently believed that this pattern was probably true of the whole continent but needed a more expert examination. Their recommendation was that SCAR should undertake an in situ assessment of all scientific research in the Antarctic. Article in Journal/Newspaper Antarc* Antarctic Antarctic Science Natural Environment Research Council: NERC Open Research Archive Antarctic The Antarctic Antarctic Science 17 4 481 486
institution Open Polar
collection Natural Environment Research Council: NERC Open Research Archive
op_collection_id ftnerc
language unknown
topic Science Policy
spellingShingle Science Policy
Walton, David
Judging quality in science. (Editorial)
topic_facet Science Policy
description The joint inspection report by Australia, Peru and the United Kingdom, presented at the last ATCM in Stockholm, contained an unusual recommendation. On the basis of the science that they had seen at the research stations the inspection team had concluded that there was both very good science and very poor science being undertaken. They apparently believed that this pattern was probably true of the whole continent but needed a more expert examination. Their recommendation was that SCAR should undertake an in situ assessment of all scientific research in the Antarctic.
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Walton, David
author_facet Walton, David
author_sort Walton, David
title Judging quality in science. (Editorial)
title_short Judging quality in science. (Editorial)
title_full Judging quality in science. (Editorial)
title_fullStr Judging quality in science. (Editorial)
title_full_unstemmed Judging quality in science. (Editorial)
title_sort judging quality in science. (editorial)
publisher Cambridge University Press
publishDate 2005
url http://nora.nerc.ac.uk/id/eprint/2042/
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954102005002993
geographic Antarctic
The Antarctic
geographic_facet Antarctic
The Antarctic
genre Antarc*
Antarctic
Antarctic Science
genre_facet Antarc*
Antarctic
Antarctic Science
op_relation Walton, David orcid:0000-0002-7103-4043 . 2005 Judging quality in science. (Editorial). Antarctic Science, 17 (4). 481. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954102005002993 <https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954102005002993>
op_doi https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954102005002993
container_title Antarctic Science
container_volume 17
container_issue 4
container_start_page 481
op_container_end_page 486
_version_ 1801383409202757632