{"product_id":"thinking-about-science-isbn-9781683674344","title":"Thinking about Science","description":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eThinking about Science: Good Science, Bad Science, and How to Make It Better\u003c\/b\u003e \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA riveting exploration of the world of science, diving headfirst into its triumphs and tribulations. \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePenned by seasoned microbiologists Ferric C. Fang and Arturo Casadevall, this book offers a comprehensive analysis of the scientific enterprise through various lenses, including historical, philosophical, and personal. \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFrom their unique vantage points as researchers, clinicians, and educators, Fang and Casadevall dissect the intricate mechanisms of science, shedding light on its strengths and weaknesses. Through engaging historical anecdotes, personal narratives, and insightful academic studies, they present a candid evaluation of science's performance, including a thought-provoking examination of its role during the COVID-19 pandemic. \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA must-read for anyone curious about the present predicaments and future potential of  science, \u003ci\u003eThinking about Science: Good Science, Bad Science, and How to Make It Better\u003c\/i\u003e is more than just a book; it's a roadmap to understanding and improving the scientific endeavor for the benefit of society at large. \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\"\u003ci\u003eThe authors have given us a thoughtful description of science and the joy of discovery, an unflinching diagnosis of where improvements are needed, and recommendations for remedies well worth considering. Scientists, science and society would benefit if this book were read by both future and established scientists, as well as the administrators, policymakers, and regulators who are in a position to help us do better.\u003c\/i\u003e\"\u003cbr\u003e \u003cb\u003eMichael Kalichman\u003c\/b\u003e, UC San Diego\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\"\u003ci\u003eWith a deep understanding of the profound impact of science on society, the authors provide thought-provoking perspectives on changes in the scientific enterprise that will support sustainable, equitable practices, and engender public trust. An engaging read for everyone with an interest in science or science policy.\u003c\/i\u003e\"\u003cbr\u003e \u003cb\u003eStanley Maloy,\u003c\/b\u003e San Diego State University\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eList of Boxes, Figures, and Tables ix\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePreface xiii\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAcknowledgments xvii\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAbout the Authors xix\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eSection I Definitions of Science 1\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 1 What Is Science? 3\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe discuss the epistemological origins of science; features of the scientific method; and characteristics to distinguish science from intuition, belief, or pseudoscience.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 2 Descriptive Science 15\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe argue that although “descriptive” is an adjective often used pejoratively, description plays a vital role in science and is essential for the generation and testing of hypotheses.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 3 Mechanistic Science 23\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe explain that the adjective “mechanistic” is often applied to explanatory science, but its meaning is relative.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 4 Reductionistic and Holistic Science 33\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe show that reductionism and holism are two ends of a scientific spectrum that are often viewed in opposition but are actually complementary and essential.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eSection II Good Science 41\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 5 Elegant Science 43\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe consider what scientists mean when they refer to an “elegant” idea or experiment and how the quest for elegance can mislead.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 6 Rigorous Science 51\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe provide a how-to guide for performing rigorous research that produces reliable results.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 7 Reproducible Science 61\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe explore why reproducibility is prized in science and why it is so elusive.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 8 Important Science 73\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe propose criteria to assess whether a scientific finding or line of inquiry is important.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 9 Historical Science 85\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe discuss why the history of a scientific discovery is important even though it may be neglected or distorted by scientists.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 10 Specialized Science 95\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe examine the value and risk of specialization in science, reasons for the emergence of scientific fields, and the growing importance of interdisciplinary teams in contemporary research.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 11 Revolutionary Science 115\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe ask what constitutes a revolution in science and consider whether revolutions truly replace older ideas or rather build upon them.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 12 Translational Science 131\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe probe the interface between basic and applied research that translates into useful applications and question whether society can or should favor one type of science over the other.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 13 Moonshot Science 141\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe review past and present major targeted investments in science akin to the moonshot program and the determinants of their success.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 14 Serendipitous Science 149\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe consider the importance of undirected exploration and the many scientific discoveries that were wholly unanticipated.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eSection III Bad Science 155\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 15 Unequal Science 157\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe reflect on how science is rife with inequality and inequity, but a diverse scientific workforce will be critically important for science’s future.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 16 Pseudoscience 171\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe explain that the power of science to persuade has led some to mimic scientific methods and language in the service of false or misguided beliefs.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 17 Duplicated Science 177\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe demonstrate that inappropriate image duplication resulting from sloppiness or misconduct is surprisingly common in the scientific literature.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 18 Fraudulent Science 195\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe show that in addition to fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism, a variety of poor research practices collectively undermine the reliability of the research enterprise and are symptomatic of a dysfunctional research culture in which incentives are misaligned with goals.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 19 Dismal Science 203\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe argue that the economics of science comprises a complex web of incentives and disincentives, as scientists compete not only for funding and jobs, but also for prestige.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 20 Competitive Science 217\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe consider that competition is conventionally viewed as a motivator for scientists but can have a negative impact on resource sharing, integrity, and creativity.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 21 Prized Science 229\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe observe that prizes are highly sought in science but epitomize the winner-take-all economics of science that unfairly allocates credit and distorts scientific history.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 22 Rejected Science 251\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe examine the essential role of peer review in science, which means that rejection of ideas, papers, and grant applications is commonplace.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 23 Unfunded Science 263\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe conclude that a persistent imbalance between the research workforce and available resources has created a preoccupation with funding, a capricious peer review system, and researcher frustration, but there may be a solution.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 24 Retracted Science 285\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe show how a study of retracted scientific publications can provide a window into the scientific enterprise and the underlying causes of fraud and error.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 25 Erroneous Science 303\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe explain how the analysis of errors can play a vital role in identifying weaknesses in how science is done and how it can be improved.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 26 Impacted Science 319\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe suggest that competition among scientists for funding and jobs has driven a preoccupation with prestigious publications and the highly flawed use of journal impact factor as a surrogate measure of publication quality.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 27 Risky Science 341\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe consider the responsibility of scientists to safeguard society from potential hazards of research and whether some types of research should be off-limits, including a balanced examination of “gain-of-function” experiments in which microbes are enhanced to study a scientific question.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 28 Authoritarian Science 353\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe review several examples that illustrate the danger of deference to authority in science.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 29 Deplorable Science 361\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe review classic examples in which science was used in an immoral manner to identify their common features and highlight important concerns when considering human experimentation.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eSection IV Future Science 371\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 30 Plague Science 373\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe reflect on the triumphs and failures of science during the COVID-19 pandemic and why countries with the strongest research programs did not always fare the best.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 31 Reforming Science 389\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe discuss the methodological, cultural, and structural reforms that the scientific enterprise should consider as it faces the future and attempts to make scientific results and the scientific literature more reliable.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eSection V Afterword 415\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChapter 32 Diseased Science 417\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003ci\u003eWe close by taking a lighthearted look at the foibles and afflictions of scientists.\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eReferences 421\u003c\/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIndex 513\u003c\/p\u003e  \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eFerric C. Fang, MD,\u003c\/b\u003e is a Professor of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Microbiology, Medicine, and Global Health at the University of Washington School of Medicine, Director of the Clinical Microbiology Laboratory at Harborview Medical Center, and a former Editor-in-Chief of \u003ci\u003eInfection and Immunity\u003c\/i\u003e. \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eArturo Casadevall, MD, PhD,\u003c\/b\u003e is a Bloomberg Distinguished Professor and Chair of Molecular Microbiology and Immunology at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, a Professor of Medicine at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, and the Editor-in-Chief of \u003ci\u003emBio\u003c\/i\u003e.   \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eThinking about Science: Good Science, Bad Science, and How to Make It Better\u003c\/b\u003e \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA riveting exploration of the world of science, diving headfirst into its triumphs and tribulations. \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePenned by seasoned microbiologists Ferric C. Fang and Arturo Casadevall, this book offers a comprehensive analysis of the scientific enterprise through various lenses, including historical, philosophical, and personal. \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFrom their unique vantage points as researchers, clinicians, and educators, Fang and Casadevall dissect the intricate mechanisms of science, shedding light on its strengths and weaknesses. Through engaging historical anecdotes, personal narratives, and insightful academic studies, they present a candid evaluation of science’s performance, including a thought-provoking examination of its role during the COVID-19 pandemic. \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA must-read for anyone curious about the present predicaments and future potential of  science, \u003ci\u003eThinking about Science: Good Science, Bad Science, and How to Make It Better\u003c\/i\u003e is more than just a book; it’s a roadmap to understanding and improving the scientific endeavor for the benefit of society at large. \u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e“\u003ci\u003eThe authors have given us a thoughtful description of science and the joy of discovery, an unflinching diagnosis of where improvements are needed, and recommendations for remedies well worth considering. Scientists, science and society would benefit if this book were read by both future and established scientists, as well as the administrators, policymakers, and regulators who are in a position to help us do better.”\u003c\/i\u003e\u003cbr\u003e \u003cb\u003e—Michael Kalichman,\u003c\/b\u003e UC San Diego\u003c\/p\u003e","brand":"ASM Press","offers":[{"title":"Default Title","offer_id":47990386131173,"sku":"NP9781683674344","price":69.95,"currency_code":"USD","in_stock":false}],"thumbnail_url":"\/\/cdn.shopify.com\/s\/files\/1\/1842\/7735\/files\/9781683674344.jpg?v=1761787616","url":"https:\/\/k12savings.com\/products\/thinking-about-science-isbn-9781683674344","provider":"K12savings","version":"1.0","type":"link"}