Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/27024
Appears in Collections:Faculty of Social Sciences Journal Articles
Peer Review Status: Refereed
Title: Revisiting "is the scientific paper a fraud?": The way textbooks and scientific research articles are being used to teach undergraduate students could convey a misleading image of scientific research
Authors: Howitt, Susan
Wilson, Anna
Contact Email: anna.wilson@stir.ac.uk
Issue Date: May-2014
Citation: Howitt S & Wilson A (2014) Revisiting "is the scientific paper a fraud?": The way textbooks and scientific research articles are being used to teach undergraduate students could convey a misleading image of scientific research, EMBO Reports, 15 (5), pp. 481-484.
Abstract: In 1963, Peter Medawar gave a talk, Is the scientific paper a fraud?, in which he argued that scientific journal articles give a false impression of the real process of scientific discovery. In answering his question, he argued that, “The scientific paper in its orthodox form does embody a totally mistaken conception, even a travesty, of the nature of scientific thought.” His main concern was that the highly formalized structure gives only a sanitized version of how scientists come to a conclusion and that it leaves no room for authors to discuss the thought processes that led to the experiments. Medawar explained that papers were presented to appear as if the scientists had no pre-conceived expectations about the outcome and that they followed an inductive process in a logical fashion. In fact, scientists do have expectations and their observations and analysis are made in light of those expectations. Although today’s scientific papers are increasingly presented as being hypothesis-driven, the underlying thought processes remain hidden; scientists appear to follow a logical and deductive process to test their idea and the results of these tests lead them to support or reject the hypothesis. However, even the trend toward more explicit framing of a hypothesis is often misleading, as hypotheses may be framed to explain a set of observations post hoc, suggesting a linear process that does not describe the actual discovery.
DOI Link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/embr.201338302
Rights: The publisher does not allow this work to be made publicly available in this Repository. Please use the Request a Copy feature at the foot of the Repository record to request a copy directly from the author. You can only request a copy if you wish to use this work for your own research or private study.

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Wilson_EMBO_Reports_2014.pdf556.7 kBAdobe PDFUnder Embargo until 31/12/2999     Request a copy

Note: If any of the files in this item are currently embargoed, you can request a copy directly from the author by clicking the padlock icon above. However, this facility is dependent on the depositor still being contactable at their original email address.



This item is protected by original copyright



Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact library@stir.ac.uk providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.