Scientific Fraud, Sloppy Science – Yes, they Happen
Science is a man-made activity; it’s fallible. However, science isn’t just an opinion.
Why do scientists cheat?
Academic promotion / deadline pressure. Not checking enough.
Overcommitment; busy senior scientist that end up as co-author but have little to do
with details of.
Ignorance; when you have too little knowledge.
Self-delusion; scientists want to believe they have uncovered new truths.
Confirmation bias.
Pressure for dramatic outcomes; the dream of getting rich from publishing new
results.
Too little research funding. Too much effort and time, too little pay.
Thrill?
What can be done?
‘Open science’, be clearer about every detail of approach, data, etc.
,The Perspective of the Stranger (3&4)
By stereotyping the behavior and motivations of others, we are able to identify predictable
patterns around us which enable us to think through a situation. Types are also used to make
sense of empirical evidence.
Schütz recommended that ideas had to link lived experience with scientific knowledge. A
scientific statement is considered to be adequate when it accounts for everyday experience
and is understandable to those who live in the relations being studied.
You cannot become too involved in the lives of the people you are studying, you can lose
sight of the objective of your research.
adopt the point of a ‘stranger. ‘Strangers’ have a unique point, able to participate in
everyday life yet still maintain a degree of detachment. Scientists have a lot of knowledge,
but only to one specific domain.
, The emergence of the social science
Positivism, language and science
The logical positivist approach
Observation is seen as the foundation of knowledge, cleanse scientific knowledge of
speculative thinking (anti-metaphysical). Analysis of language.
Words should be a simple mirror reflection of things.
Logical positivists developed their approach in an attempt to ensure that human values and
metaphysical speculation did not interfere with the accumulation of objective knowledge.
Distinction between analytic and synthetic statements.
Analytic: are seen as true by definition (‘all bachelors are unmarried’).
Synthetic: based upon observation and contribute new knowledge.
eliminate analytic statements which were speculative synthetic statements. Through
elimination all analytic statements would be ‘true by definition’ and synthetic statements
would be ‘true by reference to empirical evidence’ accumulate more knowledge of social
behavior.
Induction: collecting observational data and building theories to explain the observations.
A movement from the particular to the general.
A movement from observed events to theoretical reconstructions.
It encourages the search for confirming evidence rather than offering a critical view of the
existing knowledge.
Practical implications of logical positivism
The probability model is useful for identifying why for example people buy particular goods
in supermarkets.
Empirical regularities can help provide an indication for the future, however, this takes you
no close to explaining why such things occur.
The standard positivist approach
Deduction: mental process through which valid conclusions can be logically deduced from
valid premises, a generalization or universal law. Establish a series of logical steps in the
process of forming a theoretical statement about the world. A conclusion is posed and the
scientist engages in research to establish whether the predicted outcome is indeed the case.
E.g., heavy people leave deep footprints this person makes deep footprints this person
is heavy.
A statement is either cognitively significant or meaningless.
Practical implications of standard positivism
Committed to value freedom.
Science is a man-made activity; it’s fallible. However, science isn’t just an opinion.
Why do scientists cheat?
Academic promotion / deadline pressure. Not checking enough.
Overcommitment; busy senior scientist that end up as co-author but have little to do
with details of.
Ignorance; when you have too little knowledge.
Self-delusion; scientists want to believe they have uncovered new truths.
Confirmation bias.
Pressure for dramatic outcomes; the dream of getting rich from publishing new
results.
Too little research funding. Too much effort and time, too little pay.
Thrill?
What can be done?
‘Open science’, be clearer about every detail of approach, data, etc.
,The Perspective of the Stranger (3&4)
By stereotyping the behavior and motivations of others, we are able to identify predictable
patterns around us which enable us to think through a situation. Types are also used to make
sense of empirical evidence.
Schütz recommended that ideas had to link lived experience with scientific knowledge. A
scientific statement is considered to be adequate when it accounts for everyday experience
and is understandable to those who live in the relations being studied.
You cannot become too involved in the lives of the people you are studying, you can lose
sight of the objective of your research.
adopt the point of a ‘stranger. ‘Strangers’ have a unique point, able to participate in
everyday life yet still maintain a degree of detachment. Scientists have a lot of knowledge,
but only to one specific domain.
, The emergence of the social science
Positivism, language and science
The logical positivist approach
Observation is seen as the foundation of knowledge, cleanse scientific knowledge of
speculative thinking (anti-metaphysical). Analysis of language.
Words should be a simple mirror reflection of things.
Logical positivists developed their approach in an attempt to ensure that human values and
metaphysical speculation did not interfere with the accumulation of objective knowledge.
Distinction between analytic and synthetic statements.
Analytic: are seen as true by definition (‘all bachelors are unmarried’).
Synthetic: based upon observation and contribute new knowledge.
eliminate analytic statements which were speculative synthetic statements. Through
elimination all analytic statements would be ‘true by definition’ and synthetic statements
would be ‘true by reference to empirical evidence’ accumulate more knowledge of social
behavior.
Induction: collecting observational data and building theories to explain the observations.
A movement from the particular to the general.
A movement from observed events to theoretical reconstructions.
It encourages the search for confirming evidence rather than offering a critical view of the
existing knowledge.
Practical implications of logical positivism
The probability model is useful for identifying why for example people buy particular goods
in supermarkets.
Empirical regularities can help provide an indication for the future, however, this takes you
no close to explaining why such things occur.
The standard positivist approach
Deduction: mental process through which valid conclusions can be logically deduced from
valid premises, a generalization or universal law. Establish a series of logical steps in the
process of forming a theoretical statement about the world. A conclusion is posed and the
scientist engages in research to establish whether the predicted outcome is indeed the case.
E.g., heavy people leave deep footprints this person makes deep footprints this person
is heavy.
A statement is either cognitively significant or meaningless.
Practical implications of standard positivism
Committed to value freedom.
