 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| 3 | 1/1 | 返回列表 |
| 查看: 899 | 回復(fù): 2 | |||
qdeev金蟲 (正式寫手)
|
[交流]
【轉(zhuǎn)帖】美知名科學(xué)家撰文闡述如何描述科學(xué)問題（轉(zhuǎn)） 已有2人參與
|
|
美國西北太平洋國家實驗室知名生物學(xué)家H. Steven Wiley近日在《科學(xué)家》雜志發(fā)表文章——《保持簡潔》（Keep it Simple），稱最容易贏得經(jīng)費的方式是簡潔地描述實驗，但與此同時，這也是最難做到的一件事。以下為文章主要內(nèi)容： 對于年輕科學(xué)家，我經(jīng)常給出的建議是要就手中的數(shù)據(jù)講述一個故事，并且是基金評審委員及 期刊編委樂于聽到的故事，因為這有利于將研究思路組織并呈現(xiàn)出來，增大經(jīng)費申請和投稿的成功幾率。 但這并非易事，對于包括科學(xué)家和作家在內(nèi)的許多人來說，針對特定觀眾講述一個故事都是一件很難學(xué)會的事。講述一個好的故事需要技巧，而講述一個受歡迎的故事則需要化繁為簡，講究脈絡(luò)簡單。 我曾注意到最受歡迎的故事都是將復(fù)雜問題最后歸為黑與白、正義與邪惡，故事越簡單越能吸 引更多人，而那些情節(jié)迂回微妙的故事受歡迎度則大打折扣。比如，在癌癥形成的假說上，相比于復(fù)雜信號通路的調(diào)控失衡，將癌癥形成歸于某些基因的突變更受歡 迎，這些基因突變導(dǎo)致癌癥發(fā)生的故事也更多地出現(xiàn)在論文或?qū)W術(shù)研討會中。同樣，化繁為簡的黃金法則也適用于圖書和電影的發(fā)行。以票房大獲成功的電影《阿凡達》為例，其簡單的故事情節(jié)圍繞善與惡的斗爭呈現(xiàn)，深受全球觀眾喜愛，而獲奧斯卡最佳影片獎的電影《拆彈部隊》，雖然在藝術(shù)表現(xiàn)形式上大受贊譽，但因其情 節(jié)較復(fù)雜，票房成績慘淡。 簡單法則十分適用于描述科學(xué)問題，重要而簡單的科學(xué)故事更容易獲得經(jīng)費支持，吸引到頂尖的科研家，而那些復(fù)雜的故事則經(jīng)常隱沒于專業(yè)期刊中。于我個人而言，年輕時我也時常被位于期刊顯著位置的簡單故事所吸引，正是它們使我相信科研中能獲得問 題絕對的答案。當(dāng)然，實驗數(shù)據(jù)的現(xiàn)實性很快也打破了我的錯覺。 現(xiàn)在，雖然我的研究思路和得到的實驗數(shù)據(jù)日趨復(fù)雜，但我仍盡力堅持相對簡單地講述科學(xué)故事。因為我相信，一方面，簡單的故事更能贏得經(jīng)費及獲得同行認可；另一方面，我所研究的領(lǐng)域剛興起，還有許多未知答案，當(dāng)你沒有充分了解具體機制時，故事 的要點即是保持簡單。但令人傷心的是，我發(fā)現(xiàn)當(dāng)下講一個簡單受歡迎的故事已越來越難，而且，隨著我個人研究興趣的轉(zhuǎn)變，故事的賣點也越來越少。 作為一名獨立的科研人員，很多方面與獨立電影制片人很相似，要想在沒有很多經(jīng)費的情況下收獲成功，你必須具有出色的講故事的能力�？墒牵蠖鄶�(shù)真實的境遇是，你必須找到一個觀眾以生存下來。（科學(xué)網(wǎng) 謝文兵/編譯） One common piece of advice I frequently give to young scientists is to always tell a story with their data, because it’s a useful way of organizing and presenting research ideas. An equally important piece of advice I give is to pick a story that an audience—namely, the reviewers of grants and papers—wants to hear. It’s no easy task. Creating a story for a particular audience is one of the most difficult tasks for anyone to learn. This is true for scientists and writers as well as any creative artist who tries to understand the complexity of the world and explain it to other people. Telling a good story always takes skill. Telling a popular story, however, requires simplification. I have noticed that the most popular stories tend to cast complex matters in terms of black and white or good and evil. And the simpler the story, the broader the audience it can attract. Stories that have more nuance and eschew simple outcomes or explanations seem to be decidedly less popular. For example, it has been easier to sell the simple concept that cancers are caused by specifically mutated genes rather than by the complex deregulation of signaling networks. The former might be true in certain cases, but the latter also appears to be very common, if not more so. Yet, the gene mutation story is far more likely to appear in papers or presented to a seminar audience. The most popular books and movies almost always boil down the complexity of the world into simple terms. The enormously successful movie Avatar was a simple tale of greedy industrialists destroying the idyllic lifestyle of a primitive society. All of the subtle issues of the relative costs and benefits of advanced civilization were swept aside in favor of a moralistic tale of good versus evil. Audiences everywhere loved it. Contrast the success of Avatar with the fate of the far more sophisticated film The Hurt Locker, which presented the much more complex issues of war and the human response to danger. Artistically, it was a great success, winning numerous awards and accolades. Unfortunately, almost no one watched it, making it the lowest grossing film to win Best Picture at the Academy Awards. So it goes with scientific stories. The big and simple stories attract ample funding and top scientific talent, whereas the complex stories remain mostly ignored in specialty journals. When I was a young scientist, I too was attracted to the simple stories that were prominently featured in the trendy journals. After all, much of the science I learned came from these journals and the simplicity of their stories made me believe in the possibility of absolute answers. Of course, the reality of experimental data soon crumbled that illusion. Despite the growing complexity of my own research ideas and data, I still managed to keep most of my stories relatively simple and pitched at a clearly identified target audience. For example, we demonstrated that removing the part of the EGF receptor required for endocytosis caused cells to grow uncontrollably, thus showing the cancer community that receptor internalization attenuates signaling. Focusing on simple stories was motivated by my desire for funding and peer acceptance, of course, but was also due to the newness of the field of cell signaling. When you don’t know much about how receptors are regulated, the first things you find tend to be simple. Sadly, I have found that it gets more difficult to tell simple and popular stories as time goes on, unless you are willing to change fields. Mechanisms turn out to be complex and pathways are redundant. I also find that I have become less interested in what other people think is important and want to follow my own instincts instead. This might be more personally fulfilling, but definitely makes it more difficult to sell my stories. I might be fascinated by the architecture of a complex signaling pathway, but unless I can show that it demonstrates some fundamental biological feature, it is unlikely to interest other scientists. Being an independent scientist is similar in many ways to being an independent film maker. To be successful without a big budget, you need to have outstanding storytelling skills. However, you always have to find an audience to survive. H. Steven Wiley is Lead Biologist for the Environmental Molecular Sciences Laboratory at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. [ Last edited by qdeev on 2010-6-5 at 15:39 ] |
回復(fù)此樓» 猜你喜歡
336求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有3人回復(fù)
-
286求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有3人回復(fù)
-
一志愿華中科技大學(xué)071000，求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有3人回復(fù)
-
279分求調(diào)劑 一志愿211
已經(jīng)有14人回復(fù)
-
332求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有3人回復(fù)
-
0856材料專碩353求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有3人回復(fù)
-
材料學(xué)學(xué)碩080502 337求調(diào)劑-一志愿華中科技大學(xué)
已經(jīng)有5人回復(fù)
-
085601調(diào)劑 358分
已經(jīng)有4人回復(fù)
-
0856 271求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有3人回復(fù)
-
能源材料化學(xué)課題組招收碩士研究生8-10名
已經(jīng)有15人回復(fù)
好帖，很符合中國傳統(tǒng)的哲學(xué)觀啊 
2樓2010-07-19 11:09:00
zxf984
至尊木蟲 (文壇精英)
- 應(yīng)助: 68 (初中生)
- 金幣: 39129.9
- 散金: 30
- 紅花: 23
- 帖子: 13040
- 在線: 3544.9小時
- 蟲號: 80497
- 注冊: 2005-07-15
- 性別: GG
- 專業(yè): 無機材料化學(xué)
3樓2014-05-12 09:42:42
相關(guān)版塊跳轉(zhuǎn)
我要訂閱樓主 qdeev 的主題更新
| 3 | 1/1 | 返回列表 |
| 最具人氣熱帖推薦 [查看全部] | 作者 | 回/看 | 最后發(fā)表 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[考研] 332求調(diào)劑 +3 | 鳳凰院丁真 2026-03-20 | 3/150 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[考研] 材料學(xué)學(xué)碩080502 337求調(diào)劑-一志愿華中科技大學(xué) +4 | 順順順mr 2026-03-18 | 5/250 |
|
|
|
[考研] 306求調(diào)劑 +4 | chuanzhu川燭 2026-03-18 | 4/200 |
|
|
|
[考研] 南昌大學(xué)材料專碩311分求調(diào)劑 +6 | 77chaselx 2026-03-20 | 6/300 |
|
|
|
[考研] 310求調(diào)劑 +3 | baibai1314 2026-03-16 | 3/150 |
|
|
|
[考研] 一志愿南昌大學(xué)，327分，材料與化工085600 +9 | Ncdx123456 2026-03-19 | 9/450 |
|
|
|
[考研] 323求調(diào)劑 +3 | 洼小桶 2026-03-18 | 3/150 |
|
|
|
[考研] 一志愿武漢理工材料工程專碩調(diào)劑 +9 | Doleres 2026-03-19 | 9/450 |
|
|
|
[考研] 324求調(diào)劑 +5 | lucky呀呀呀鴨 2026-03-20 | 5/250 |
|
|
|
[考研] 一志愿 西北大學(xué) ，070300化學(xué)學(xué)碩，總分287，雙非一本，求調(diào)劑。 +4 | 晨昏線與星海 2026-03-19 | 4/200 |
|
|
|
[考研] 085600材料與化工 +8 | 安全上岸！ 2026-03-16 | 8/400 |
|
|
|
[考研] 本人考085602 化學(xué)工程 專碩 +19 | 不知道叫什么！ 2026-03-15 | 21/1050 |
|
|
|
[考研]
 295復(fù)試調(diào)劑
+8
|
簡木ChuFront 2026-03-19 | 8/400 |
|
|
|
[考研] 289求調(diào)劑 +6 | 懷瑾握瑜l 2026-03-20 | 6/300 |
|
|
|
[基金申請]
學(xué)校已經(jīng)提交到NSFC，還能修改嗎？
 40+4
|
babangida 2026-03-19 | 8/400 |
|
|
|
[考研] 266求調(diào)劑 +5 | 陽陽哇塞 2026-03-14 | 10/500 |
|
|
|
[考研] 材料考研調(diào)劑 +3 | xwt。 2026-03-19 | 3/150 |
|
|
|
[考研] 0703化學(xué) 305求調(diào)劑 +4 | FY_yy 2026-03-14 | 4/200 |
|
|
|
[考研] 301求調(diào)劑 +4 | A_JiXing 2026-03-16 | 4/200 |
|
|
|
[考研]
 11408 一志愿西電，277分求調(diào)劑
+3
|
zhouzhen654 2026-03-16 | 3/150 |
|