What is Science?
CHAPTER 1
Science
 Methods used to collect information about a
specific area of interest and build reliable
amount of knowledge on that area
 Knowledge is acquired through research
(scientific method)
 Developing theories to describe, explain, and
organized collected information
 Must be able to be modified if new
information is discovered
Scientist
 Someone who does science
 Adopts the methods of science in the quest
for knowledge
 Diverse group of people doing diverse
activities in lots of areas
 Share one common goal: acquire knowledge
through application of scientific methods and
techniques
Science: A way of thinking
 Define parameters, seek information, test
hypotheses
 Skeptical of what is presented in the media
 Question validity of statements
 Never take information at “face value”
Research: Basic and Applied
 Basic research – conducted to investigate
issues relevant to theoretical or empirical
positions
 Goal – acquire general information about a
phenomenon with little emphasis placed on realworld examples of that phenomenon
Research: Basic and Applied
 Applied research – finding information that
can be applied to a real-world problem
 Goal – generate information that can be applied
directly
Research: Basic and Applied
 Overlap – the distinction between basic and
applied is not always clear
 Some areas of study have both basic and
applied aspects
Research: Why you should
care!
 Media covers many scientific topics (stem cell
research, global warming, cancer drugs, use
of new products, etc.)
 Must be able to analyze, critically, the
information to separate fact from conjecture
True Science
 Relies on scientific method
 Acquires information
 Adheres to certain rules to validate the data
Protoscience
 “on the edge” of current scientific
understanding
 Uses scientific method
 Can become true science IF phenomena
studied receives enough scientific support
 Can descend into pseudoscience IF claims are
not verified
Nonscience
 Academic discipline that applies systematic
techniques to acquire information
 Lacks empirical testing to support the
information
 So it cannot be justified through science
Pseudoscience
 “false science”
 Ideas based on theories that are not scientific
 Does share characteristics with true science
 Does not have the same rigor or standards
required of true science (ex: astrology – using
the stars’ positions to explain behavior and
predict the future)
Pseudoscience is defined by:









Using situations to explain away a falsification
No mechanisms for self-correction
Relying on confirming beliefs
Shifting burden of proof to skeptics/critics
Relying on anecdotal evidence or testimonials
Avoiding peer review
Failing to build a base of scientific knowledge
Using “big” words to make it sound credible
Failing to give conditions that would falsify the
ideas
Pseudoscience
 No single criterion (on previous slide) can
classify an idea as pseudoscience
 The greater number of criterion an idea
“posssess” the more confident one will be
that the idea IS pseudoscience
Scientific explanations
 Are based on the application of accepted
scientific methods
 True science attempts to develop
explanations of phenomena within their own
domains
Scientific explanations
 Are empirical – based on evidence of the
senses
 Observations conducted under controlled
conditions
 Must be verified by others
Scientific explanations
 Are rational – following the rules of logic and
are consistent with known facts
Scientific explanations
 Are testable – verifiable by direct observation
or lead to specific predictions
 May be disproved if predicted outcome is not
observable
Scientific explanations
 Are parsimonious – explains behavior or
observations with the fewest assumptions
Scientific explanations
 Are general – scientists prefer the broad
explanation rather than one that works only
in define limits
Scientific explanations
 Are tentative – scientists have confidence and
yet entertain the idea that explanations can
be faulty
Scientific explanations
 Are rigorously evaluated – for consistency
with the evidence and with known principles,
for parsimony, and for generality
 Attempts are made to broaden the
explanation
Commonsense explanations
 Based on limited information available from
the observed event and previous experience
 Based on what we sense is true
 Tend to be accepted at “face value”
Belief-based explanations
 Often believed because they come from a
trusted source
 No evidence is required
 If evidence suggests the belief is false, the
evidence is discarded or reinterpreted to
match the belief
Failures due to faulty
inference
 Observations are made and before we infer
the causes
 There is always danger of incorrectly inferring
the causes or mechanisms
 Faulty conclusions can be drawn if they are
based on unfounded assumptions
Pseudoexplanations
 Failing to consider alternative explanations
 Sometimes positions, theories, and other
explanations only give alternative labels but
don’t explain the behavior
 Using instinct to explain behavior is “circular
explanation” or “tautology”; only gives
another label or an observed behavior
Method of authority
 Consulting sources that are considered
“experts” in a certain area (books, TV,
religious leaders, scientists, journals)
 Useful in early stages of inquiry
 Do not always provide valid answers to
questions
 Source may not be truly authoritative
 Sources are often biased
Rational method
 Proposed by Descartes in 17th century states
that valid conclusions about the universe
could be drawn though the use of pure reason
 “self-evident truths” must be true; to assume
otherwise would contradict logic
 SO “ I think, therefore I am”
 Rationalism relies on logical reasoning rather
than authority
Scientific method
 Uses 4 cyclical steps that are used repeatedly
to find solutions to problems
 Observation
 Formulating hypotheses (statements of cause and
effect)
 Further observation / experimentation
 Refining and retesting explanations
Observing a phenomenon
 Watching a behavior or event that is
interesting
 Curiosity is energized
 Begin to formulate “causes” for that
phenomenon
Observing a phenomenon
 Variables are identified
 Variables must be capable of taking on at least
two values
 Variables with only one value = constant (because
it doesn’t change)
Formulating testable
explanations
 Now to develop explanations that seem
consistent with the observations
 Include the relationship between the
variables (use an If…then… statement)
 Explanations must be testable AND falsifiable
 HYPOTHESIS
Further
observation/experimentation
 Additional observations are needed to
validate the hypothesis
 Design a research study to test the proposed
relationship
 Correlational study – to measure two or more
variables and look for relationship between them
 Quasi-experimental study – take advantage of
natural event or preexisting conditions
 Experiment – where one variable is manipulated
and you measure changes in the responding form
Refining and retesting
 Supporting a hypothesis with research leads
to formation of new / more detailed
hypothesis (refinement)
 Sometimes research rejects the hypothesis,
in which case a new hypothesis will be
developed or you revise and retest the
original hypothesis
 All hypotheses, whether original, revised, or
refined must be RIGOROUSLY tested!