The journal Science is adding an extra round of statistical checks to its peer-review process, editor-in-chief Marcia McNutt announced today. The policy follows similar efforts from other journals, after widespread concern that basic mistakes in data analysis are contributing to the irreproducibility of many published research findings.

“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 editors (SBoRE). Manuscripts will be flagged up for additional scrutiny by the journal’s internal editors, or by its existing Board of Reviewing Editors or by outside peer reviewers. The SBoRE panel will then find external statisticians to review these manuscripts.

Asked whether any particular papers had impelled the change, McNutt said: “The creation of the ‘statistics board’ was motivated by concerns broadly with the application of statistics and data analysis in scientific research and is part of Science’s overall drive to increase reproducibility in the research we publish.” 

Giovanni Parmigiani, a biostatistician at the Harvard School of Public Health, a member of the SBoRE group, says he expects the board to “play primarily an 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.”

John Ioannidis, a physician who studies research methodology, says that the policy is “a most welcome step forward” and “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.

Professional scientists are expected to know how to analyse 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 Science’s idea to pass some papers to statisticians “has some merit, but a weakness is that it relies on the board of reviewing editors to identify ‘the papers that need scrutiny’ in the first place”.

1.It can be learned from Paragraph 1 that_______.

A Science intends to simplify its peer-review process

B journals are strengthening their statistical checks

C few journals are blamed for mistakes in data analysis

D lack of data analysis is common in research projects

解析：选B。B 推理判断题。根据第一段第二句可知，《自然》杂志之所以采取这一项新举措，也是效仿的其他期刊的做法，原因是人们普遍担心数据分析中的基本错误导致了许多已发表研究成果的不可复制性，由此推断其他期刊也在加强它们的统计审查工作。此题易错选D项：缺乏数据分析是研究项目中的常见问题。该项偷梁换柱，原文只提到basic mistakes in data analysis（数据分析中的基本错误），而并非研究项目中缺乏数据分析。故选B。

2.The phrase “flagged up” (Para. 2) is the closest in meaning to_______.

A found

B revised

C marked

D stored

解析：选C。C 词义猜测题。根据该短语所在句及其后一句：稿件将被______，接受期刊内部编辑的进一步审查, 或者……，接下来SBoRE小组将找到外部统计学家来审查这些稿件；而外部统计学家要从这些稿件中挑出部分稿件来审查，这些稿件必定是内部编辑“做过标记”的，由此推断flag up意为“做标记，标记”，与mark同义，故选C。

3.Giovanni Parmigiani believes that the establishment of the SBoRE may_______.

A pose a threat to all its peers

B meet with strong opposition

C increase Science’s circulation

D set an example for other journals

解析：选D。D 细节理解题。题干意为：乔瓦尼·帕尔马贾尼认为，成立SBoRE可以_______。答案出处定位到原文第四段Giovanni Parmigiani所说的话“...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.”（这种影响不仅会体现在《科学》杂志上刊发的文章中，还有望会影响后来更多想要以《科学》杂志为榜样的出版机构），可知成立SBoRE可能会为其他期刊树立榜样。原文中的model...after...（模仿，仿效）与D项中的set an example互为同义转换；A、B、C三项在文章中均没有提到。故选D。

4.David Vaux holds that what Science is doing now_______.

A adds to researchers’ workload

B diminishes the role of reviewers

C has room for further improvement

D is to fail in the foreseeable future

解析：选C。C 推理判断题。题干意为：大卫·沃克斯认为《科学》杂志目前的举措_______。答案出处定位到原文最后一段中David Vaux所说的话，Science’s idea to pass some papers to statisticians “has some merit, but a weakness is that it relies on the board of reviewing editors to identify ‘the papers that need scrutiny’ in the first place（《科学》杂志把一些论文交给统计学家的想法“有一些优点，但缺点是它首先要依靠审查编辑委员会来确定“需要审查的论文”），可知他认为该举措有优点，但是也有缺点，言外之意就是该举措还有进一步改进的空间。故选C。

5.Which of the following is the best title of the text?

A Science Joins Push to Screen Statistics in Papers

B Professional Statisticians Deserve More Respect

C Data Analysis Finds Its Way onto Editors’ Desks

D Statisticians Are Coming Back with Science

解析：选A。A 文章标题题。第一段第一句提出文章讨论话题：《科学》杂志采取新举措，即“增加额外统计审查”；第二三段具体阐释该举措的内容以及背景原因；第四至六段是三位专家对该举措的评价；由此可知《科学》杂志对其发表的论文增加统计审查”为全文论述主题，A项“《科学》加入推进论文统计审查”为最佳标题。故选A。