As most of us know, Bush appointee, Latin America history expert, and Professional Valve William R. Steiger PhD blocked numerous government public health documents and did his damndest to ruin the reputations of hard-working medicos. As a reward for his help, Bush has appointed this interesting character to Mozambique, perhaps to prove that Ebola doesn't really exist. Nevertheless, there is a bright side to this nasty affair: we have the opportunity to share with the world what this history afficianado used to smack down reports that didn't meet Bush's standards, hereinafter termed The Steiger Critera. Read on. . .
While good science requires good review, it is usually a given that the reviewer know something about the subject. In some organizations this is rarely the case, most notably, the G.W.Bush administration. Especially in Republican administrations bureaucratic valves (information plugs) or non-science hacks are often allowed to manage the flow of detailed scientific information. Typically, if the bureaucrat doesn't understand the big words, he or she will send it back for a re-write or may even reject it outright. Even the science-savvy tend to follow the political marching orders: politically-connected academicians given the job of reviewing proposals tend to give high marks only to those proposals employing technology they understand.
Backing up a bit. . .to systems analysts and sociologists, characters like Steiger are termed "valves" because their position allows them to restrict the flow of information. So, using a rule of thumb learned in business school, they red-flag the entire report by using terms that are simply unquantifiable--and thus cannot come back to bite them.
Bush's Public Health valve William R. Steiger, (History PhD) used such terms when valving some important work by his intellectual betters. Recently with regard to a Steiger-precipitated dustup, an HHS spokesman saidone report was "often inaccurate or out-of- date and it lacked analysis and focus," and that (according to Steiger himself) a report was delayed because of "sloppy work, poor analysis, and lack of scientific rigor."
Thus, the Steiger Criteria:
- "Inaccurate." This one is close to the edge of reality because some things found in reports can actually be inaccurate, i.e. not reflecting reality. But in order to make sense, the inaccuracy must be spelled out. If it is not, then the term is meaningless. For example, was the inaccuracy due to an improperly-transcribed formula, to an inappropriate assumption (i.e. it was hot in New York the last time I visited, so it will hot there the next time I visit) or to something more mundane, like a rounded-off value not representing the "real" value. . .i.e. the value for Pi (which no "final number" has been determined.) Thus, the term "inaccurate," used without explanation is a Valvejob-ready Weasel Word.
- "Out-of-date." This often applies to references cited and posits the assumption that some references are so old that they should never be used. This assumes that in science (like in business) there is "bad" information that has passed it's consumption date. That can be the case in some rare circumstances such as in ulcer refs prior to the discovery of the role of helicobacter pylori; but for most cases, the "out-of-date" term is a ready tool of the Valvejobber.
- "Lacked analysis and focus." Interestingly "analysis" refers to taking apart the subject in order to examine it, while "focus" refers to narrowing the inquiry onto a discrete target. Thus the terms are essentially opposites. When Valvejobbers use the terms "analysis and focus" in the same sentence, be assured that they have no idea what they're talking about, but are attempting to use vaguely technical-sounding words to criticize the project.
- "Sloppy work." Often used by the Valvejobber with a mean streak and a subpar intelligence. The visual calls to mind food issues as in "sloppy Joes." Dead giveaway that the reviewer is food-obsessed.
- "Poor analysis." "Poor" can be replaced with the terms "weak" or "ineffective." Regardless, the term "analysis" is most often used by the Valvejobber with the sorriest analytical toolset. Think of it as Valvejobber Analysis Envy.
- "Lack of Scientific Rigor." When the Valvejobber uses this term be assured that he/she was once an academician. Among college professors (even down to the Community College level)"lack of scientific rigor" is the nastiest term that can be flung at a rival's work. Oddly, it's a term that most Valvejobbers like Steiger routinely use when deep-sixing documents with subject matter outside their own field. His, presumably, included the history of Patagonian Gauchos and NOT Public Health in the United States. Used by people who don't understand the subject anyway, "lack of scientific rigor" should be viewed with suspicion.
In fact, when used by any political appointee or bureaucrat tasked with reviewing documents outside their own field of expertise, the entire foregoing Steiger Criteria should be viewed with suspicion.
So I propose these terms--which I call the Steiger Criteria be immortalized in the Wikipedia. And when the next Bush hack/Professional Valvejobber uses these terms to suppress good information--and they will--more people will know something of the Bush-style "Review Process."
So, I suggest that it's time to formally commit The Steiger Criteria to The Wiki .