Some Scientists Were Working on an Experiment to Learn More

question 36

Multiple Choice

Some scientists were working on an experiment to learn more about how frogs react to pesticides in the frog's aquatic habitat. They completed their studies and published in the journal, Nature. You read the study and learn that one of the scientists was part-owner of the company that produces the pesticide studied; however, they did repeat the study and the knowledge has added to the field. Other scientists are now repeating the study. What conclusion can you make about the study in regards to science?

• A) The study was objective, robust, repeated, and contributes to the body of knowledge so it is good science.
• B) The study should be seen as suspect, but the replication and confirmation by others means that the findings are valid.
• C) The study should not be published as it is not good science since frogs were exposed to pesticides which may have negatively affected them.
• D) Since one of the scientists was associated with the pesticide company the study cannot be considered objective and therefore is not good science.
• E) The conflict of interest should be overlooked as this is not a problem in science.

---

Definitions:

Hypertension

A chronic medical condition in which the blood pressure in the arteries is persistently elevated, also known as high blood pressure.

Acute Anxiety

A sudden and intense feeling of fear, worry, or apprehension, often with physical symptoms such as increased heart rate and sweating.

Second-Generation Neuroleptic

A class of drugs used to treat psychiatric disorders, such as schizophrenia, which tend to have fewer side effects than first-generation antipsychotics.

Clozaril

A brand name for clozapine, an antipsychotic medication used to treat schizophrenia.