Selective and self-serving use and interpretation of research and its findings

Selective and self-serving use and interpretation of research and its findings seems to be all too common these days.

The purpose of generating scientific research is to better understand things and help people.

Synthesis and interpretation of scientific research is an important action toward that end.

I feel as though I've observed increasing inconsistency and greater liberties in how this occurs.

Some reference and ascribe credibility only to the research that supports their position, while disregarding or devaluing more reliable research.

Subjective and inconsistent critical analysis and valuation of research quality seems to be commonplace - its robustness, perceived conflict among authors and journals, appropriateness and quality of design, reasonable interpretation of findings. 

Some don't understand or value the importance or implications of the peer review and publication process and findings.

Some interpret findings very broadly, and others very narrowly. 

Some accept one article of questionable robustness to substantiate their position but hold differentially higher standards for others.

In evaluating and interpreting research and its implications, some conflate experience, evidence, expertise. Some take offense to calling out the difference between these things. Some present these as competing rather than valid in their own right.

I feel like this is representative of a trend. A trend to invoke scientific research and findings for personal agendas over the interest of pursuing scientific advancement and the interest of others.

This seems to be, at least in part, the result of greater occurrence and acceptance of inconsistent and subjective interpretation and critical analysis of these and other factors related to research and findings.

I believe the items listed here can contribute meaningfully to the anti-science and pseudoscience movement and ideology. 

I'm not suggesting the better part of our community is doing this intentionally, or that motives are bad. 

Maybe it's lack of, or inconsistency in, education. 

We are all susceptible to this.

Before we address this, however, we need to have collective shared value around whether this matters and our standards around it.

What do you think?

___

Brandon Herscovitch, Ph.D., LABA, BCBA-D

Partners Behavioral Health can help with your clinical and business standards, compliance, and outcomes. We can help you scale an ethical ABA practice you’re proud about.