When Gregor Mendel began his investigations of plant genetics in the 1800s, he worked alone — a middle-aged European monk counting peas in the abbey garden. One hundred and fifty years later, modern plant genetics laboratories, like Chelsea Specht's below, look a lot more diverse and employ the latest DNA sequencing techniques. When J.J. Thomson discovered a new particle of matter — the electron — at the turn of the century, his lab equipment mainly consisted of vacuum tubes, magnets, and some simple wiring. One hundred years later, scientists searching for new particles like the Higgs boson use a supercollider — a 17-mile-long machine that costs several billion dollars and will produce data to be analyzed by the most powerful supercomputer in the world. Science has come a long way in the last 150 years! We now have more powerful data analysis techniques, more sophisticated equipment for makingobservations and running experiments, and a much greater breadth and depth of scientific knowledge. And as the attitudes of the broader society have progressed, science has benefited from the expanding diversity of perspectives offered by its participants. But what about the process of science itself? Has this fundamental aspect of the scientific enterprise changed over time?
Publication and peer review The rise of the Internet has enabled scientific results to be publicized more rapidly than ever before possible. Journal articles are often made available online even before they are printed. This swift distribution of information can speed the pace of science since the latest studies can be scrutinized,replicated, and/or built upon with very little lag time. And as more and more journals provide records of reader comments on e-published articles, the process of peer review is being extended: many more scientists can provide feedback on a particular article and they may do it long after the article's original publication. But the information flow doesn't stop there. Journalists can also quickly access the latest scientific findings and begin to publicize them to the broader population. Scientific information on a wide variety of topics is now available to anyone with an Internet connection — which makes staying informed convenient, but also carries responsibilities. Consumers of this information must remember that, in science, the first report of a finding is never the last word. Many years and multiple rounds of testing may be required before science can be confident about a particular conclusion. With so much information, from so many different sources, it is now more important than ever to be a critical consumer of media messages about science.
Specialization and collaboration As our scientific knowledge has advanced and the questions we seek to answer have become more complex, science has become more specialized. While Charles Darwin's research in the 1800s seems to have known no bounds — he studied everything from evolutionary theory, to geology, to human emotions, to soil ecology, to tropical corals, to barnacles and botany — a modern scientist is much more likely to focus on a narrower topic: salamander development, for example, or ancient climate changes in aquatic ecosystems. It's not that modern scientists' interests range less widely, but that our knowledge has expanded to such a degree that developing the expertise (and resources) necessary to conduct research at the cutting edge of a field can represent a huge investment of time and effort. Because of this, modern scientists tend to be more specialized than their predecessors.
In the 1830s, while travelling on theBeagle, Charles Darwin amassed for scientific study a vast collection of animal and plant specimens from around the world. In the 1880s, Louis Pasteur tested a vaccine by exposing groups of vaccinated and unvaccinated sheep to anthrax bacteria. In the 1890s, Marie and Pierre Curie's studies of radiation were carried out without any environmental or safety precautions — and, in fact, their research notes from those years are still so radioactive that scholars wishing to study them must sign a risk waiver! Today, each of these studies would be subject to significant regulation from government agencies and scientific bodies — but historically, relatively few guidelines and rules have pertained to the ethics, safety, and environmental impact of scientific research. As society and the scientific community have become increasingly concerned about these ramifications, scientific and governmental organizations have set up guidelines to minimize potentially negative impacts and ensure that research is carried out ethically.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||