The experiment is not working

Science. The word itself has so many different connotations. For myself, science is definitive or at least it should be. Ideas can change and the experiments may not explain the full story but science should be definitive. This is where biases enter the arena. In the pursuit of definitive science, researchers are cherry-picking the data that fits their particular narrative. Researchers think they are speaking the truth and are publishing the truth. However, the other experiments that do not fit the narrative are slid into supplemental figure 8 or unpublished.

            From Dan Ariely’s The Honest Truth about Dishonesty, he speaks about an experiment with ten minute conversations between strangers. Afterwards, each stranger would state that they had not lied during the conversation. Upon further scrutiny, it would be revealed that they had lied two to three times. In my opinion, this is what happens during observational biases that occur every day in scientific research. The pressure to succeed, excel, and continually publish. This has created an environment where the successful experiments are taken to the PI and the experiments that do not fit into the story are not mentioned. PIs are beginning to write papers before all of the research is performed. We are placing huge biases

            During my time in research, there has been several instances where experiments from the lab or from different labs are not believed to be correct because they do not fit the narrative the PI is trying to tell. Beyond this, I heard one PI state that the experiment was not working because it did not fit their narrative. The experiment was working but it was not giving the expected result needed to fit within their already published story. They proceeded to repeat this experiment until it gave them the result they wanted for three experiments…

Scientists believe they are communicating truth but we are slipping in lies.