Re: Bias in Science, Part 1

Randy Isaac wrote:
>Most people seem to recognize the existence of prejudicial bias, though few do enough to avoid it.  I think high-energy physicists are the best at instituting practices that guard against prejudicial bias.  Their experiments involve so many people, so much time, so much money, and such complex infrastructure, with so much at stake, that every safeguard possible must be exercised.  Typically, the raw data will be deliberately offset by an unknown (by those doing the analysis) parameter, which is removed only at the last moment to reveal the final result.  In an industrial lab of the type I have managed, the competitive pressure to succeed is enormous and the tendency toward prejudice in interpreting data is powerful.  One of my biggest responsibilities was to be vigilant and ensure avoidance of such prejudice in order to maintain the quality of the lab and the accuracy of the results.  Yet, it was not an easy task to accomplish.  I can cite!
 several technical and business decisions that, in hindsight, were based on data of which the interpretation was really prejudiced.
>

I generally agree, but it might be good to add ways to avoid
generating lots of grief on good new ideas. Of course we
_must_ be very cautious about "new ideas", and I don't want
to suggest otherwise. But whereas ignorance is not considered
a sin, indolence certainly is. We should not resort to scientific
prejudice as an excuse for the latter.

Generally, I find the more independent "hand holds" I can
place on some problem, the more assured I am of the validity.
More and more, I find the most grief prone results are those
that rely on fitting. Likewise for statistics if there is
no physical model to back it up with. Another important way
to check the soundness is to look at limiting cases. But
most important is to really care about what the truth actually
is. One should (in the end) want to find every way to be sure
he/she is right. Maybe the worst situation for anyone is
that he/she has always had success and never made a mistake
before. That may be partly why we have some strange ideologues
that turn up from time to time.

Wayne
Received on Wed May 11 11:56:15 2005