Rapid Communication--Science allows its methods and results to be spread widely and quickly. The rapid spread is due to the public nature of science combined with the technologies of information dispersal. Today, computer networks and electronic mail are the fastest ways of communicating new discoveries. Many universities are now connected to the Internet, a global computer network, and many students can connect to this new technology too. Another fairly rapid method that scientists use is the scientific meeting. Meetings are held at all levels, from international ones all the way on down to local ones. Faculty regularly attend national and regional scientific meetings, such as the American Psychological Association meeting and the Southwestern Psychological Association meeting. Psychology students frequently attend such meetings also. Finally, publication in journals and books is another, although slower, method of communicating results and methods. The typical lag time for publication, that is, the time from when a manuscript is accepted until when it is published, is about 9-18 months, depending on the journal. The lag time for a book may be as long as 3 years. So, what you read in journals is year-old science, and what you read in books is older still. What you hear at meetings is new and hot, and what you read on electronic mail may be red hot.
Reliable Data--By only accepting data that can be reproduced, science assures itself that its data are reliable. So, when some new discovery is made, the first thing that happens is that others attempt to reproduce that discovery. The "cold fusion" episode of a few years ago is a good example. Two chemists claimed they had observed fusion at room temperature. But, when others attempted to reproduce those results, they could not. Thus, cold fusion is not accepted as a scientific finding.
Intellectual freedom--One of the biggest advantages of science, but one that is not always lived up to, is intellectual freedom, the intellectual freedom to go where the data lead. In science, one's opinions, hopes, and desires for how some data from a study may turn out count for nothing next to the data themselves. For example, let's say that I am a scientist who believes that people with red hair have lower levels of intelligence. So, I conduct an experiment, but I find that the intelligence of red-haired people is no less than that of non-red-headed people. Now, as a scientist, I have to believe my data not my opinion.
- Junk Science--index, interm., medium, links, graphics, search
- Home page of the The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition (TASSC), a group dedicated to debunking "junk science", or bad science. Page contains articles, archives, FAQs, cartoons, and more. http://www.junkscience.com/