I think we need a better word than 'suspect'. Perhaps one less loaded with negative connotations. All research papers should be viewed critically. But the idea that because some small minority of research scientists have engaged in dishonest practice all research should be considered 'morally' suspect, which is what we are in fact talking about, is unreasonable.
All research is 'suspect' only in terms of it having to be proved and scrutinised and not taken at face value without some kind of critical appraisal of methodology and results. To approach all scientific research papers with one eye open to fraud is an over reaction to a very small problem.
[eta]
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZenGum
I notice that this is the second thread we've had in a few months about criticisms of academic and scientific research.  It didn't start in the cellar, but I'm wondering if some vested interests are deliberately trying to undermine confidence in research. |
Not just 'research'. Academia in general. There have been a lot of negative academia stories in the news recently; the kind that basically suggest that academia is a big-business con trick and academicians somehow less worthy and more distant than other professionals.
Which is probably why my tone may have been unnecessarily abrasive. There is a little cultural war being played out, over here and in the US; don't know about other places. It's no coincidence that respect ratings for teachers (along with wages in the public/non-fee sector) are lower here than in most other countries.
You're right that the scientific world seems to come in for special approbation at times. They're clearly perceived as dangerous; whilst other academics are simply not valued.