NOBA

Why Science?
Edward Diener

Scientific research has been one of the great drivers of progress in human history, and the
dramatic changes we have seen during the past century are due primarily to scientific findings
—modern medicine, electronics, automobiles and jets, birth control, and a host of other
helpful inventions. Psychologists believe that scientific methods can be used in the behavioral
domain to understand and improve the world. Although psychology trails the biological and
physical sciences in terms of progress, we are optimistic based on discoveries to date that
scientific psychology will make many important discoveries that can benefit humanity. This
module outlines the characteristics of the science, and the promises it holds for understanding
behavior. The ethics that guide psychological research are briefly described. It concludes with
the reasons you should learn about scientific psychology

Learning Objectives

• Describe how scientific research has changed the world.

• Describe the key characteristics of the scientific approach.

• Discuss a few of the benefits, as well as problems that have been created by science.

• Describe several ways that psychological science has improved the world.

• Describe a number of the ethical guidelines that psychologists follow.

Scientific Advances and World Progress

Why Science? 2

There are many people who have made positive contributions to humanity in modern times.
Take a careful look at the names on the following list. Which of these individuals do you think
has helped humanity the most?

1. Mother Teresa

2. Albert Schweitzer

3. Edward Jenner

4. Norman Borlaug

5. Fritz Haber

The usual response to this question is “Who on earth are Jenner, Borlaug, and Haber?” Many
people know that Mother Teresa helped thousands of people living in the slums of Kolkata
(Calcutta). Others recall that Albert Schweitzer opened his famous hospital in Africa and went
on to earn the Nobel Peace Prize. The other three historical figures, on the other hand, are
far less well known. Jenner, Borlaug, and Haber were scientists whose research discoveries
saved millions, and even billions, of lives. Dr. Edward Jenner is often considered the “father
of immunology” because he was among the first to conceive of and test vaccinations. His
pioneering work led directly to the
eradication of smallpox. Many other
diseases have been greatly reduced
because of vaccines discovered using
science—measles, pertussis, diphtheria,
tetanus, typhoid, cholera, polio, hepatitis
—and all are the legacy of Jenner. Fritz
Haber and Norman Borlaug saved more
than a billion human lives. They created
the “Green Revolution” by producing
hybrid agricultural crops and synthetic
fertilizer. Humanity can now produce
food for the seven billion people on the
planet, and the starvation that does occur
is related to political and economic
factors rather than our collective ability
Due to the breakthrough work of Dr. Edward Jenner, millions of
to produce food.
vaccinations are now administered around the world every year
preventing the spread of many treatable diseases while saving the
lives of people of all ages. [Image: CDC Global Health, https://goo. If you examine major social and
gl/hokiWz, CC BY 2.0, https://goo.gl/9uSnqN] technological changes over the past
Why Science? 3

century most of them can be directly attributed to science. The world in 1914 was very different
than the one we see today (Easterbrook, 2003). There were few cars and most people traveled
by foot, horseback, or carriage. There were no radios, televisions, birth control pills, artificial
hearts or antibiotics. Only a small portion of the world had telephones, refrigeration or
electricity. These days we find that 80% of all households have television and 84% have
electricity. It is estimated that three quarters of the world’s population has access to a mobile
phone! Life expectancy was 47 years in 1900 and 79 years in 2010. The percentage of hungry
and malnourished people in the world has dropped substantially across the globe. Even
average levels of I.Q. have risen dramatically over the past century due to better nutrition and
schooling.

All of these medical advances and technological innovations are the direct result of scientific
research and understanding. In the modern age it is easy to grow complacent about the
advances of science but make no mistake about it—science has made fantastic discoveries,
and continues to do so. These discoveries have completely changed our world.

What Is Science?

What is this process we call “science,” which has so dramatically changed the world? Ancient
people were more likely to believe in magical and supernatural explanations for natural
phenomena such as solar eclipses or thunderstorms. By contrast, scientifically minded people
try to figure out the natural world through testing and observation. Specifically, science is the
use of systematic observation in order to acquire knowledge. For example, children in a
science class might combine vinegar and baking soda to observe the bubbly chemical reaction.
These empirical methods are wonderful ways to learn about the physical and biological world.
Science is not magic—it will not solve all human problems, and might not answer all our
questions about behavior. Nevertheless, it appears to be the most powerful method we have
for acquiring knowledge about the observable world. The essential elements of science are
as follows:

1. Systematic observation is the core of science. Scientists observe the world, in a very organized
way. We often measure the phenomenon we are observing. We record our observations
so that memory biases are less likely to enter in to our conclusions. We are systematic in
that we try to observe under controlled conditions, and also systematically vary the
conditions of our observations so that we can see variations in the phenomena and
understand when they occur and do not occur.

2. Observation leads to hypotheses we can test. When we develop hypothesesand theories, we

state them in a way that can be tested. For example, you might make the claim that candles
Why Science? 4

made of paraffin wax burn more slowly

than do candles of the exact same size and
shape made from bee’s wax. This claim
can be readily tested by timing the burning
speed of candles made from these
materials.

3. Science is democratic. People in ancient

times may have been willing to accept the
views of their kings or pharaohs as
absolute truth. These days, however,
people are more likely to want to be able
to form their own opinions and debate
conclusions. Scientists are skeptical and
have open discussions about their
Systematic observation is the core of science. [Image: Cvl
observations and theories. These debates Neuro, https://goo.gl/Avbju7, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://goo.gl/
often occur as scientists publish competing uhHola]
findings with the idea that the best data
will win the argument.

4. Science is cumulative. We can learn the important truths discovered by earlier scientists and
build on them. Any physics student today knows more about physics than Sir Isaac Newton
did even though Newton was possibly the most brilliant physicist of all time. A crucial
aspect of scientific progress is that after we learn of earlier advances, we can build upon
them and move farther along the path of knowledge.

Psychology as a Science

Even in modern times many people are skeptical that psychology is really a science. To some
degree this doubt stems from the fact that many psychological phenomena such as
depression, intelligence, and prejudice do not seem to be directly observable in the same way
that we can observe the changes in ocean tides or the speed of light. Because thoughts and
feelings are invisible many early psychological researchers chose to focus on behavior. You
might have noticed that some people act in a friendly and outgoing way while others appear
to be shy and withdrawn. If you have made these types of observations then you are acting
just like early psychologists who used behavior to draw inferences about various types of
personality. By using behavioral measures and rating scales it is possible to measure thoughts
and feelings. This is similar to how other researchers explore “invisible” phenomena such as
the way that educators measure academic performance or economists measure quality of life.
Why Science? 5

One important pioneering researcher was Francis Galton, a cousin of Charles Darwin who
lived in England during the late 1800s. Galton used patches of color to test people’s ability to
distinguish between them. He also invented the self-report questionnaire, in which people
offered their own expressed judgments or opinions on various matters. Galton was able to
use self-reports to examine—among other things—people’s differing ability to accurately
judge distances.

Although he lacked a modern understanding

of genetics Galton also had the idea that
scientists could look at the behaviors of
identical and fraternal twins to estimate
the degree to which genetic and social
factors contribute to personality; a
puzzling issue we currently refer to as the
“nature-nurture question.”

In modern times psychology has become

more sophisticated. Researchers now
use better measures, more sophisticated
study designs and better statistical
analyses to explore human nature.
Simply take the example of studying the
emotion of happiness. How would you go
In 1875 Francis Galton did pioneering studies of twins to determine
about studying happiness? One straight­
how much the similarities and differences in twins were affected
by their life experiences. In the course of this work he coined the
forward method is to simply ask people
phrase "Nature versus Nurture". [Image: XT Inc., https://goo.gl/ about their happiness and to have them
F1Wvu7, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0, https://goo.gl/Toc0ZF] use a numbered scale to indicate their
feelings. There are, of course, several
problems with this. People might lie about their happiness, might not be able to accurately
report on their own happiness, or might not use the numerical scale in the same way. With
these limitations in mind modern psychologists employ a wide range of methods to assess
happiness. They use, for instance, “peer report measures” in which they ask close friends and
family members about the happiness of a target individual. Researchers can then compare
these ratings to the self-report ratings and check for discrepancies. Researchers also use
memory measures, with the idea that dispositionally positive people have an easier time
recalling pleasant events and negative people have an easier time recalling unpleasant events.
Modern psychologists even use biological measures such as saliva cortisol samples (cortisol
is a stress related hormone) or fMRI images of brain activation (the left pre-frontal cortex is
one area of brain activity associated with good moods).
Why Science? 6

Despite our various methodological advances it is true that psychology is still a very young
science. While physics and chemistry are hundreds of years old psychology is barely a hundred
and fifty years old and most of our major findings have occurred only in the last 60 years.
There are legitimate limits to psychological science but it is a science nonetheless.

Psychological Science is Useful

Psychological science is useful for creating interventions that help people live better lives. A
growing body of research is concerned with determining which therapies are the most and
least effective for the treatment of psychological disorders.

For example, many studies have shown that

cognitive behavioral therapy can help many
people suffering from depression and
anxiety disorders (Butler, Chapman, Forman,
& Beck, 2006; Hoffman & Smits, 2008). In
contrast, research reveals that some types
of therapies actually might be harmful on
average (Lilienfeld, 2007).

In organizational psychology, a number of

psychological interventions have been
found by researchers to produce greater
productivity and satisfaction in the workplace
(e.g., Guzzo, Jette, & Katzell, 1985). Human
factor engineers have greatly increased the Cognitive Behavioral Therapy has shown to be effective in
safety and utility of the products we use. For treating a variety of conditions, including depression. [Image:
example, the human factors psychologist SalFalco, https://goo.gl/3knLoJ, CC BY-NC 2.0, https://goo.gl/

Alphonse Chapanis and other researchers HEXbAA]

redesigned the cockpit controls of aircraft to

make them less confusing and easier to respond to, and this led to a decrease in pilot errors
and crashes.

Forensic sciences have made courtroom decisions more valid. We all know of the famous
cases of imprisoned persons who have been exonerated because of DNA evidence. Equally
dramatic cases hinge on psychological findings. For instance, psychologist Elizabeth Loftus
has conducted research demonstrating the limits and unreliability of eyewitness testimony
and memory. Thus, psychological findings are having practical importance in the world outside
Why Science? 7

the laboratory. Psychological science has experienced enough success to demonstrate that
it works, but there remains a huge amount yet to be learned.

Ethics of Scientific Psychology

Psychology differs somewhat from the natural

sciences such as chemistry in that researchers
conduct studies with human research participants.
Because of this there is a natural tendency to want
to guard research participants against potential
psychological harm. For example, it might be
interesting to see how people handle ridicule but it
might not be advisable to ridicule research
participants.

Scientific psychologists follow a specific set of

guidelines for research known as a code of ethics.
There are extensive ethical guidelines for how
human participants should be treated in
psychological research (Diener & Crandall, 1978;
Sales & Folkman, 2000). Following are a few Diagram of the Milgram Experiment in which the
highlights: "teacher" (T) was asked to deliver a (supposedly)
painful electric shock to the "learner"(L). Would this
experiment be approved by a review board today?
1. Informed consent. In general, people should know
[Image: Fred the Oyster, https://goo.gl/ZIbQz1, CC
when they are involved in research, and
BY-SA 4.0, https://goo.gl/X3i0tq]
understand what will happen to them during the
study. They should then be given a free choice as to whether to participate.

2. Confidentiality. Information that researchers learn about individual participants should not
be made public without the consent of the individual.

3. Privacy. Researchers should not make observations of people in private places such as
their bedrooms without their knowledge and consent. Researchers should not seek
confidential information from others, such as school authorities, without consent of the
participant or his or her guardian.

4. Benefits. Researchers should consider the benefits of their proposed research and weigh
these against potential risks to the participants. People who participate in psychological
studies should be exposed to risk only if they fully understand these risks and only if the
likely benefits clearly outweigh the risks.
Why Science? 8

5. Deception. Some researchers need to deceive participants in order to hide the true nature
of the study. This is typically done to prevent participants from modifying their behavior
in unnatural ways. Researchers are required to “debrief” their participants after they have
completed the study. Debriefing is an opportunity to educate participants about the true
nature of the study.

Why Learn About Scientific Psychology?

I once had a psychology professor who asked my class why we were taking a psychology
course. Our responses give the range of reasons that people want to learn about psychology:

1. To understand ourselves

2. To understand other people and groups

3. To be better able to influence others, for example, in socializing children or motivating

employees

4. To learn how to better help others and improve the world, for example, by doing effective
psychotherapy

5. To learn a skill that will lead to a profession such as being a social worker or a professor

6. To learn how to evaluate the research claims you hear or read about

7. Because it is interesting, challenging, and fun! People want to learn about psychology
because this is exciting in itself, regardless of other positive outcomes it might have. Why
do we see movies? Because they are fun and exciting, and we need no other reason. Thus,
one good reason to study psychology is that it can be rewarding in itself.

Conclusions

The science of psychology is an exciting adventure. Whether you will become a scientific
psychologist, an applied psychologist, or an educated person who knows about psychological
research, this field can influence your life and provide fun, rewards, and understanding. My
hope is that you learn a lot from the modules in this e-text, and also that you enjoy the
experience! I love learning about psychology and neuroscience, and hope you will too!
Why Science? 9

Outside Resources

Web: Science Heroes- A celebration of people who have made lifesaving discoveries.
http://www.scienceheroes.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=258&Itemid=27

Discussion Questions

1. Some claim that science has done more harm than good. What do you think?

2. Humanity is faced with many challenges and problems. Which of these are due to human
behavior, and which are external to human actions?

3. If you were a research psychologist, what phenomena or behaviors would most interest
you?

4. Will psychological scientists be able to help with the current challenges humanity faces,
such as global warming, war, inequality, and mental illness?

5. What can science study and what is outside the realm of science? What questions are
impossible for scientists to study?

6. Some claim that science will replace religion by providing sound knowledge instead of
myths to explain the world. They claim that science is a much more reliable source of
solutions to problems such as disease than is religion. What do you think? Will science
replace religion, and should it?

7. Are there human behaviors that should not be studied? Are some things so sacred or
dangerous that we should not study them?
Why Science? 10

Vocabulary

Empirical methods
Approaches to inquiry that are tied to actual measurement and observation.

Ethics
Professional guidelines that offer researchers a template for making decisions that protect
research participants from potential harm and that help steer scientists away from conflicts
of interest or other situations that might compromise the integrity of their research.

Hypotheses
A logical idea that can be tested.

Systematic observation
The careful observation of the natural world with the aim of better understanding it.
Observations provide the basic data that allow scientists to track, tally, or otherwise organize
information about the natural world.

Theories
Groups of closely related phenomena or observations.
Why Science? 11

References

Butler, A. C., Chapman, J. E., Forman, E. M., & Beck, A. T. (2006). The empirical status of cognitive-
behavioral therapy: A review of meta-analyses. Clinical Psychology Review, 26, 17–31.

Diener, E., & Crandall, R. (1978). Ethics in social and behavioral research. Chicago, IL: University
of Chicago Press.

Easterbrook, G. (2003). The progress paradox. New York, NY: Random House.

Guzzo, R. A., Jette, R. D., & Katzell, R. A. (1985). The effects of psychologically based intervention
programs on worker productivity: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 38, 275.291.

Hoffman, S. G., & Smits, J. A. J. (2008). Cognitive-behavioral therapy for adult anxiety disorders.
Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 69, 621–32.

Lilienfeld, S. O. (2007). Psychological treatments that cause harm. Perspectives on Psychological

Science, 2, 53–70.

Moore, D. (2003). Public lukewarm on animal rights. Gallup News Service, May 21.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/8461/public-lukewarm-animal-rights.aspx

Sales, B. D., & Folkman, S. (Eds.). (2000). Ethics in research with human participants. Washington,
DC: American Psychological Association.
About Noba

The Diener Education Fund (DEF) is a non-profit organization founded with the mission of re-
inventing higher education to serve the changing needs of students and professors. The initial
focus of the DEF is on making information, especially of the type found in textbooks, widely
available to people of all backgrounds. This mission is embodied in the Noba project.

Noba is an open and free online platform that provides high-quality, flexibly structured
textbooks and educational materials. The goals of Noba are three-fold:

• To reduce financial burden on students by providing access to free educational content

• To provide instructors with a platform to customize educational content to better suit their
curriculum

• To present material written by a collection of experts and authorities in the field

The Diener Education Fund is co-founded by Drs. Ed and Carol Diener. Ed is the Joseph Smiley
Distinguished Professor of Psychology (Emeritus) at the University of Illinois. Carol Diener is
the former director of the Mental Health Worker and the Juvenile Justice Programs at the
University of Illinois. Both Ed and Carol are award- winning university teachers.

Acknowledgements

The Diener Education Fund would like to acknowledge the following individuals and companies
for their contribution to the Noba Project: The staff of Positive Acorn, including Robert Biswas-
Diener as managing editor and Peter Lindberg as Project Manager; The Other Firm for user
experience design and web development; Sockeye Creative for their work on brand and
identity development; Arthur Mount for illustrations; Chad Hurst for photography; EEI
Communications for manuscript proofreading; Marissa Diener, Shigehiro Oishi, Daniel
Simons, Robert Levine, Lorin Lachs and Thomas Sander for their feedback and suggestions
in the early stages of the project.
Copyright

R. Biswas-Diener & E. Diener (Eds), Noba Textbook Series: Psychology. Champaign, IL: DEF
Publishers. Retrieved from http://noba.to/qu4abpzy

Copyright © 2020 by Diener Education Fund. This material is licensed under the Creative
Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. To view a copy
of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/deed.en_US.

The Internet addresses listed in the text were accurate at the time of publication. The inclusion
of a Website does not indicate an endorsement by the authors or the Diener Education Fund,
and the Diener Education Fund does not guarantee the accuracy of the information presented
at these sites.

Contact Information:

Noba Project
www.nobaproject.com
[email protected]
How to cite a Noba chapter using APA Style

Diener, E. (2020). Why science?. In R. Biswas-Diener & E. Diener (Eds), Noba textbook series:
Psychology. Champaign, IL: DEF publishers. Retrieved from http://noba.to/qu4abpzy