此为2015考研英语一的阅读文章。
The journal Science is adding an extra source at Peer-review process, editor-in-chief Marcia McNott announced today. The Follows similar efforts from other journals, after widespread concern that Mistakes in data analysis are contributing to the Published research findings.
《科学》杂志主编玛西娅·麦克纳特今天宣布，该杂志将为互评过程增加额外的一轮统计检查。这项措施跟随了其它的杂志步伐。很多人担心数据分析过程中犯的基本错误会导致许多出版了的研究发现无法得到再现。
Readers must have confidence in the conclusions published in our journal,writes McNutt in an editorial. Working with the American Statistical Association, the Journal has appointed seven experts to a statistics board of reviewing Manut will be flagged up for additional scrutiny by the Journals editors, or by its existing Board of Reviewing Editors or by outside peer The SBoRE panel will then find external statisticians to review these
读者需要我们出版的期刊能提供值得相信的结果，麦克纳特在一篇评论中写道。与美国统计协会合作，该杂志已经委任7名专家进入对统计结果进行审稿的编辑部（SBoRE）。文章的初稿可以由杂志内部的编辑或审校编辑或外部的审校者标记待审核。SBoRE之后就会请外部的统计专家来审核这些稿件。
Asked whether any particular papers had impelled the change, McNutt said,The creation of thestatistics boardwas motivated by concerns broadly with the application of statistics and data analysis in scientific research and is part of Sciences overall drive to increase reproducibility in the research we publish.
被问到是否是哪篇具体的文章促成了这次的改变时，麦克纳特说：“这次统计审核编辑部的成立是因为在科学研究领域，有对应用统计和数据分析方法的疑虑。同时它也是《科学》杂志增加出版的文章内所讲成果的再现能力的行动的一部分。
Giovanni Parmigiani，a biostatistician at the Harvard School of Public Health, a mr of the SBoRE group, says he expects the board to play primarily on advisory role. He agreed to join because he found the foresight behind the establishment of the SBoRE to be novel, unique and likely to have a lasting impact. This impact will not only be through the publications in Science itself, but hopefully through a larger group of publishing places that may want to model their approach after Science.
乔瓦尼·帕玛强尼，哈佛大学公共卫生学院的生物统计学家，SBoRE的成员之一，表示希望这个编辑部的主要职能是提供建议。他之所以同意加入，是因为他发现建立SBoRE的做法很新奇、独特，并有可能产生长远的影响。这种影响不仅会通过《科学》杂志自身传播，还有更多希望通过想效仿《科学》杂志的其它刊物传播。
John Ioannidis, a physician who studies research methodology, says that the policy is a most welcome step forwardand long overdue,Most journals are weak in statistical review，and this damages the quality of what they publish. I think that, for the majority of scientific papers nowadays, statistical review is more essential than expert review,he says. But he noted that biomedical journals such as Annals of Internal Medicine, the Journal of the American Medical Association and The Lancet pay strong attention to statistical review.
约翰·尼迪斯，一位研究研究方法的内科医生，认为这项措施是受到广大支持但姗姗来迟的一次进步。大多数期刊在统计审校方面做得比较薄弱，这会影响出版物的质量。他认为对于现在的大多数科学文章来说，统计审校比专家评审更加重要。但他也指出，如《内科医学年刊》、《美国医学会杂志》和《柳叶刀杂志》这样的生物医药期刊，对统计审校尤其重视。
Professional scientists are expected to know how to analyze data, but statistical errors are alarmingly common in published research，according to David Vaux，a cell biologist. Researchers should improve their standards, he wrote in 2012，but journals should also take a tougher line，engaging reviewers who are statistically literate and editors who can verify the process.Vaux says that Sciences idea to pass some papers to statisticians has some merit，but a weakness is that it relies on the board of reviewing editors to identifythe papers that need scrutinyin the first place.
细胞生物学家大卫·沃克斯认为专业的科学家应该知道如何分析数据，但数据统计的错误在出版的研究中很常见，这让人惊讶。他在2012年指出，研究者应该提高自身的标准，但期刊也要把好关，让懂统计的审校和能对这一过程进行检验的编辑参与进来。沃克斯也指出，《科学》杂志让统计学家审核文章的想法有优点，但也有缺点。就是它依赖于审校编辑部的编辑来判定文章是否需要进一步的审核。