Learners worldwide collectively spend millions of hours per week testing their skills on assignments with known answers. Might some of this time fruitfully be spent posing and exploring novel questions? This paper investigates an approach for learners to contribute scientific ideas. The Gut Instinct system embodies this approach, hosting online learning materials and invites learners to collaboratively brainstorm potential influences on people's microbiome. A between-subjects experiment compared the performance of participants who engaged in just learning, just contributing, or a combination. Participants in the learning condition scored highest on a summative test. Participants in both the contribution and combined conditions generated novel, useful questions; there was not a significant difference between the two. Though participants in the combined condition both learned and contributed, this setting did not exhibit an additive benefit, such as better learning in the combined condition. These results highlight the promise and difficulty of double-bottom-line learning experiences.

BACKGROUND: In many microarray experiments, analysis is severely hindered by a major difficulty: the small number of samples for which expression data has been measured. When one searches for differentially expressed genes, the small number of samples gives rise to an inaccurate estimation of the experimental noise. This, in turn, leads to loss of statistical power. RESULTS: We show that the measurement noise of genes with similar expression levels (intensity) is identically and independently distributed, and that this (intensity dependent) distribution is approximately normal. Our method can be easily adapted and used to test whether these statement hold for data from any particular microarray experiment. We propose a method that provides an accurate estimation of the intensity-dependent variance of the noise distribution, and demonstrate that using this estimation we can detect differential expression with much better statistical power than that of standard t-test, and can compare the noise levels of different experiments and platforms. CONCLUSIONS: When the number of samples is small, the simple method we propose improves significantly the statistical power in identifying differentially expressed genes.