A Critical Choice ■ 29Did scientific conclusions
logically follow from analysis of
the experimental results to
support, or fail to support, the
hypothesis?Has the observation given rise to
a clear and measurable
hypothesis?1
2
Real Science!Is it real science? Or pseudoscience?Is there an initial observation
based on observable and
quantifiable phenomena?Pseudoscience is often based on
phenomena that cannot be seen or
measured.Pseudoscience often begins with a
vague or unclearly stated research
question, or one that is contrary to
well-documented facts and theories
of the physical and natural world.Has the hypothesis generated
testable and falsifiable
predictions?3 The predictions of pseudoscience are
often nonspecific, unobservable, and
unquantifiable.5
Overstated conclusions, beliefs
stated as scientific fact, and logical
fallacies are all signs of
pseudoscience.Have the results undergone
review from practicing
scientists and been published in
an established scientific journal?6
Pseudoscience does not fare well in
peer review, and it does not tend to
be published in respected journals.Is there a carefully designed,
reproducible experiment with
sufficient sample sizes, clearly
identified experimental variables,
and control groups?4
When experimental data are
anecdotal or poorly described, or
experimental results are not
repeatable, they indicate
pseudoscience or—at best—bad
science.YesYesYesYesYesYesNoNoNoNoNoNoFigure 2.7
Science or pseudoscience?
A series of simple questions based on the scientific method can help you
determine whether a “scientific” study is real science or pseudoscience.
Q1: State the hypothesis of the people who believe that vaccines
cause autism. What is an alternative hypothesis?Q2: What part(s) of the figure show(s) where Wakefield’s study failed
to meet the standards of the scientific method?Q3: Why does only one arrow point to “real science,” whereas multiple
arrows point to pseudoscience?