RESUMEN
Elea-Maria Abisamra is an honors undergraduate student and research fellow at Virginia Tech. She is majoring in Cognitive and Behavioral Neuroscience and has passions for STEM, writing, and entrepreneurship. In June 2022, Elea acted on her dream and founded Kids Can Write, becoming a CEO of a global nonprofit organization helping turn kids into published authors while teaching them STEM in an innovative and unique way. This is her story.
Asunto(s)
Comunicación , Estudiantes , Creatividad , Emociones , Escritura , Ciencia/educaciónRESUMEN
In this issue of Cell, Nuñez et al. develop CRISPRoff, a programmable epigenetic memory writer capable of establishing specific gene silencing programs that are stably maintained across cell division and differentiation. The singular dCas9 fusion offers a simple, reliable, and general tool for genome-wide screens, multiplexed editing, and potential therapeutics.
Asunto(s)
Sistemas CRISPR-Cas , Edición Génica , Epigenómica , Regiones Promotoras Genéticas , EscrituraRESUMEN
The implantation of electrodes on the visual cortex of blind individuals could lead to the restoration of a rudimentary form of sight. In this issue of Cell, Beauchamp et al. use electrical stimulation of the visual cortex to create visual perception of shapes.
Asunto(s)
Corteza Visual , Ojo , Humanos , Percepción Visual , EscrituraRESUMEN
Who are science journalists, and how can journalists and research scientists work together to improve science communication?
Asunto(s)
Comunicación , Periodismo , Ciencia , Técnicas Genéticas , Genética/tendencias , Opinión Pública , EscrituraRESUMEN
Cho et al. (2021) and Villa et al. (2021) demonstrate that mTORC1 stimulates m6A mRNA methylation via WTAP expression and SAM synthesis. Increased mRNA methylation in turn promotes cell growth by enhancing mRNA degradation or translation.
Asunto(s)
Estabilidad del ARN , Escritura , Diana Mecanicista del Complejo 1 de la Rapamicina/genética , Metilación , ARN Mensajero/genética , ARN Mensajero/metabolismoRESUMEN
Ancient history relies on disciplines such as epigraphy-the study of inscribed texts known as inscriptions-for evidence of the thought, language, society and history of past civilizations1. However, over the centuries, many inscriptions have been damaged to the point of illegibility, transported far from their original location and their date of writing is steeped in uncertainty. Here we present Ithaca, a deep neural network for the textual restoration, geographical attribution and chronological attribution of ancient Greek inscriptions. Ithaca is designed to assist and expand the historian's workflow. The architecture of Ithaca focuses on collaboration, decision support and interpretability. While Ithaca alone achieves 62% accuracy when restoring damaged texts, the use of Ithaca by historians improved their accuracy from 25% to 72%, confirming the synergistic effect of this research tool. Ithaca can attribute inscriptions to their original location with an accuracy of 71% and can date them to less than 30 years of their ground-truth ranges, redating key texts of Classical Athens and contributing to topical debates in ancient history. This research shows how models such as Ithaca can unlock the cooperative potential between artificial intelligence and historians, transformationally impacting the way that we study and write about one of the most important periods in human history.
Asunto(s)
Arqueología/métodos , Aprendizaje Profundo , Escritura/historia , Antigua Grecia/etnología , Escritura Manual , Historia Antigua , Humanos , Programas InformáticosRESUMEN
Curated scientific databases catalogue and amplify research findings to maximize their reach. Authors should write their papers with this in mind, ensuring that data are accurate, easy to extract, and presented in standardized formats.
Asunto(s)
Escritura , Bases de Datos FactualesRESUMEN
Works of fiction play a crucial role in the production of cultural stereotypes. Concerning gender, a widely held presumption is that many such works ascribe agency to men and passivity to women. However, large-scale diachronic analyses of this notion have been lacking. This paper provides an assessment of agency attributions in 87,531 fiction works written between 1850 and 2010. It introduces a syntax-based approach for extracting networks of character interactions. Agency is then formalized as a dyadic property: Does a character primarily serve as an agent acting upon the other character or as recipient acted upon by the other character? Findings indicate that female characters are more likely to be passive in cross-gender relationships than their male counterparts. This difference, the gender agency gap, has declined since the 19th century but persists into the 21st. Male authors are especially likely to attribute less agency to female characters. Moreover, certain kinds of actions, especially physical and villainous ones, have more pronounced gender disparities.
Asunto(s)
Escritura , Femenino , Masculino , Humanos , Historia del Siglo XIX , Historia del Siglo XX , Historia del Siglo XXI , Literatura , Identidad de GéneroRESUMEN
Written and oral communication are skills graduate students often request training in and supervisors often bemoan the lack of. We describe an approach to address this training gap using an instructional model that integrates experienced research-active PIs with an expert in the study and teaching of technical writing.
Asunto(s)
Comunicación , Escritura , HumanosAsunto(s)
Autoria , Procesamiento de Lenguaje Natural , Investigadores , Escritura , Escritura/normas , Autoria/normasAsunto(s)
Autoria , Investigadores , Escritura , Humanos , Guías como Asunto , Investigadores/psicologíaRESUMEN
Peer review is a well-established cornerstone of the scientific process, yet it is not immune to biases like status bias, which we explore in this paper. Merton described this bias as prominent researchers getting disproportionately great credit for their contribution, while relatively unknown researchers get disproportionately little credit [R. K. Merton, Science 159, 56-63 (1968)]. We measured the extent of this bias in the peer-review process through a preregistered field experiment. We invited more than 3,300 researchers to review a finance research paper jointly written by a prominent author (a Nobel laureate) and by a relatively unknown author (an early career research associate), varying whether reviewers saw the prominent author's name, an anonymized version of the paper, or the less-well-known author's name. We found strong evidence for the status bias: More of the invited researchers accepted to review the paper when the prominent name was shown, and while only 23% recommended "reject" when the prominent researcher was the only author shown, 48% did so when the paper was anonymized, and 65% did when the little-known author was the only author shown. Our findings complement and extend earlier results on double-anonymized vs. single-anonymized review [R. Blank, Am. Econ. Rev. 81, 1041-1067 (1991); M. A. Ucci, F. D'Antonio, V. Berghella, Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. MFM 4, 100645 (2022)].
Asunto(s)
Revisión por Pares , Escritura , Humanos , Revisión de la Investigación por Pares/métodos , InvestigadoresRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Op-ed writing can be a powerful and accessible advocacy tool for physicians, but training is lacking in undergraduate medical education. AIM: To train and engage first-year medical students in op-ed writing. SETTING: Midwestern research-intensive medical school. PARTICIPANTS: All students in a required first-year health policy course in 2021 and 2022. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: For their health policy course's final assignment, students could opt to write an op-ed on a healthcare issue of their choice. All students received written instruction on op-ed writing. Additionally, they could access a seminar, coaching and editing by peers and faculty, and publication guidance. PROGRAM EVALUATION: Of 179 students over 2 years, 105 chose to write op-eds. Fifty-one attended the seminar, 35 attended peer coaching sessions, 33 accessed structured peer editing, and 23 received faculty assistance. Thirty-eight students submitted a total of 42 op-eds for publication. Twenty-two pieces were published in major outlets and 17 in the university's health policy review. Of the 22 in major outlets, 21 received editing from either peers or faculty. DISCUSSION: An op-ed writing curriculum can be integrated into an existing medical school health policy course, resulting in a high level of engagement and in published op-eds by medical students.
Asunto(s)
Curriculum , Educación de Pregrado en Medicina , Estudiantes de Medicina , Escritura , Humanos , Educación de Pregrado en Medicina/métodos , Política de Salud , Defensa del Paciente/educaciónRESUMEN
Scientists routinely use images to display data. Readers often examine figures first; therefore, it is important that figures are accessible to a broad audience. Many resources discuss fraudulent image manipulation and technical specifications for image acquisition; however, data on the legibility and interpretability of images are scarce. We systematically examined these factors in non-blot images published in the top 15 journals in 3 fields; plant sciences, cell biology, and physiology (n = 580 papers). Common problems included missing scale bars, misplaced or poorly marked insets, images or labels that were not accessible to colorblind readers, and insufficient explanations of colors, labels, annotations, or the species and tissue or object depicted in the image. Papers that met all good practice criteria examined for all image-based figures were uncommon (physiology 16%, cell biology 12%, plant sciences 2%). We present detailed descriptions and visual examples to help scientists avoid common pitfalls when publishing images. Our recommendations address image magnification, scale information, insets, annotation, and color and may encourage discussion about quality standards for bioimage publishing.
Asunto(s)
Obras Pictóricas como Asunto/tendencias , Escritura/normas , Investigación Biomédica , Comunicación , Humanos , Publicaciones Periódicas como Asunto , Publicaciones/normas , Edición/tendencias , Comunicación AcadémicaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: ChatGPT, a publicly available artificial intelligence large language model, has allowed for sophisticated artificial intelligence technology on demand. Indeed, use of ChatGPT has already begun to make its way into medical research. However, the medical community has yet to understand the capabilities and ethical considerations of artificial intelligence within this context, and unknowns exist regarding ChatGPT's writing abilities, accuracy, and implications for authorship. OBJECTIVE: We hypothesize that human reviewers and artificial intelligence detection software differ in their ability to correctly identify original published abstracts and artificial intelligence-written abstracts in the subjects of Gynecology and Urogynecology. We also suspect that concrete differences in writing errors, readability, and perceived writing quality exist between original and artificial intelligence-generated text. STUDY DESIGN: Twenty-five articles published in high-impact medical journals and a collection of Gynecology and Urogynecology journals were selected. ChatGPT was prompted to write 25 corresponding artificial intelligence-generated abstracts, providing the abstract title, journal-dictated abstract requirements, and select original results. The original and artificial intelligence-generated abstracts were reviewed by blinded Gynecology and Urogynecology faculty and fellows to identify the writing as original or artificial intelligence-generated. All abstracts were analyzed by publicly available artificial intelligence detection software GPTZero, Originality, and Copyleaks, and were assessed for writing errors and quality by artificial intelligence writing assistant Grammarly. RESULTS: A total of 157 reviews of 25 original and 25 artificial intelligence-generated abstracts were conducted by 26 faculty and 4 fellows; 57% of original abstracts and 42.3% of artificial intelligence-generated abstracts were correctly identified, yielding an average accuracy of 49.7% across all abstracts. All 3 artificial intelligence detectors rated the original abstracts as less likely to be artificial intelligence-written than the ChatGPT-generated abstracts (GPTZero, 5.8% vs 73.3%; P<.001; Originality, 10.9% vs 98.1%; P<.001; Copyleaks, 18.6% vs 58.2%; P<.001). The performance of the 3 artificial intelligence detection software differed when analyzing all abstracts (P=.03), original abstracts (P<.001), and artificial intelligence-generated abstracts (P<.001). Grammarly text analysis identified more writing issues and correctness errors in original than in artificial intelligence abstracts, including lower Grammarly score reflective of poorer writing quality (82.3 vs 88.1; P=.006), more total writing issues (19.2 vs 12.8; P<.001), critical issues (5.4 vs 1.3; P<.001), confusing words (0.8 vs 0.1; P=.006), misspelled words (1.7 vs 0.6; P=.02), incorrect determiner use (1.2 vs 0.2; P=.002), and comma misuse (0.3 vs 0.0; P=.005). CONCLUSION: Human reviewers are unable to detect the subtle differences between human and ChatGPT-generated scientific writing because of artificial intelligence's ability to generate tremendously realistic text. Artificial intelligence detection software improves the identification of artificial intelligence-generated writing, but still lacks complete accuracy and requires programmatic improvements to achieve optimal detection. Given that reviewers and editors may be unable to reliably detect artificial intelligence-generated texts, clear guidelines for reporting artificial intelligence use by authors and implementing artificial intelligence detection software in the review process will need to be established as artificial intelligence chatbots gain more widespread use.
Asunto(s)
Inteligencia Artificial , Ginecología , Urología , Humanos , Indización y Redacción de Resúmenes , Publicaciones Periódicas como Asunto , Programas Informáticos , Escritura , AutoriaRESUMEN
Writing and receiving reference letters in the time of COVID.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemias , COVID-19/epidemiología , Humanos , Estudiantes , EscrituraRESUMEN
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review and meta-analysis was to explore the effectiveness of creative writing therapies for the management of depression and suicidal ideation. RECENT FINDINGS: Twenty one of the 31 reviewed studies showed that creative writing significantly improved depressive symptoms, while five studies suggested improvement in other symptoms. The results of meta-analyses showed that narrative writing significantly reduced depression compared to those in neutral writing or treatment as usual condition in both post intervention and follow-up. However, the number of studies exploring the effects of creative writing in suicidal ideation was too low to perform a meta-analysis. A structured and well-targeted intervention using creative writing could have beneficial results for the management of depressive symptoms. More studies are needed to explore the potential benefits of creative writing for reducing suicidal ideation.