Research is currently ongoing and will automatically be updated below. Full and complete research articles are restricted to students who have paid for that article. All ongoing studies will also be posted for free, but the content will be limited to a summary of what is being studied and any relevant news pertaining to the progress of the research.
Aristodemic research differs radically from academic research. Typically, academic research is conducted in the form of individual studies, each of which are usually funded by grants. It is almost always the case that granters expect researchers to have something to show within one year of funding. In turn, this incentivizes researchers to narrow the scope of their studies and neglect to capture the complexities of the real word, in order to meet artificial deadlines. As a result, scientific advancement progresses in small and (almost) insignificant increments, and as minimally (but consistently) as possible.
In contrast to academic research, aristodemic research is conducted in the form of research projects, where each project consists of multiple studies. Other differences are that aristodemic research standards comply with the DBN News credibility requirements pertaining to Original Content Producers, and that aristodemic studies use DBN-format citations. Furthermore, aristodemic granters fund research projects rather than a specific study, and they do not expect something to show; they expect answers to the questions that a project sets out to understand – even if it takes a decade. This dynamic incentivizes researchers to expand the scope of their studies in order to have holistic explanations that capture the complexities of the real world. As a result, scientific advancement progresses in significant leaps that fundamentally alter scientific understandings, albeit inconsistently.
To summarize, neither research approach is necessarily better than the other; they simply differ in their risk-reward calculations. Academic research is low-risk / low-reward and reliably outputs incrementally new information. Aristodemic research is high-risk / high-reward and unreliably outputs game-changing discoveries. Science needs both approaches.