Consider a thought experiment. Two graduate students have written identical dissertations: the same experiments, the same data, the same robust findings. One is written as a standard, cautious text that flatters the subfield whose intuitions drove the design and to whom the findings will feel familiar. The other reframes the study for a different, but equally relevant, audience—one holding different suppositions and therefore open to being surprised into shifting its position. The latter approach is more valuable for good reasons: the scientific community and the world will learn more.
Trending
- 1xCup organisers unveil plans for 2026 tournament
- Pompeii: Out of Time With Tom Hiddleston – the tale of ordinary Romans’ hopeless heroism is tearjerking television | Television & radio
- Japanese business culture focus of new study abroad offering at MSU
- World Cup final tickets near $2.3m mark on FIFA’s resale platform | World Cup 2026
- Big Law braces for second fight with Donald Trump over capitulation deals
- Andy Burnham to scrap digital ID to focus on ‘helping with cost of living’
- Cross-cohort analysis of expression and splicing quantitative trait loci in TOPMed | Science
- Spain’s Yamal aims to join elite club of teenage World Cup winners
