In Response: We are all biased, but the scientific process recognizes that and delivers despite it; still, it can do a better job-A perspective from academia

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)
Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1068-1069
Number of pages2
JournalEnvironmental Toxicology and Chemistry
Volume35
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2016

Fingerprint

World Wide Web
Risk assessment
Environmental assessments

Cite this

@article{1a613541096b4e8297e24455e4187a57,
title = "In Response: We are all biased, but the scientific process recognizes that and delivers despite it; still, it can do a better job-A perspective from academia",
author = "Peter Calow and Forbes, {Valery E}",
year = "2016",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1002/etc.3355",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "35",
pages = "1068--1069",
journal = "Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry",
issn = "0730-7268",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Ltd",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - In Response

T2 - We are all biased, but the scientific process recognizes that and delivers despite it; still, it can do a better job-A perspective from academia

AU - Calow, Peter

AU - Forbes, Valery E

PY - 2016/5/1

Y1 - 2016/5/1

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84963576378&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84963576378&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/etc.3355

DO - 10.1002/etc.3355

M3 - Article

C2 - 27089438

AN - SCOPUS:84963576378

VL - 35

SP - 1068

EP - 1069

JO - Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry

JF - Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry

SN - 0730-7268

IS - 5

ER -