For many millennia across centralised cultures, the institution of academia has been the torch bearer of knowledge into the unknown. Whether this has been to explore unventured frontiers in medicine, engineering, astronomy or a deeper delve into the unique fabrics of different cultures and society through history, sociology and anthropology. Institutionalised academia has ventured into answering whatever curiosities that have been faced.
The process from conception to methodology, results and conclusion is (in the best cases) chronicled and documented in research papers. These publicly available (though often behind paywalls) research papers allow anyone from scholars, educators, to curious individuals to be able to read and gain knowledge on specific issues. If you've ever heard the phrase “researchers/scientists say,” it's probably a citation or a paraphrasing in relation to something stated in a research paper.
However, this once revered doctrine of academia has as of late slowly began to lose integrity. Over the last two decades many papers have either been debunked, or been used to push narratives that are not true leading to much of the general public losing faith. In this article we will examine how the institution of academia has begun to lose public trust and how we as the general public can safeguard against dubious “research”.
The Abuse of Research Work
Research and their medium, research papers have been a cornerstone of associating facts with daily life. Many people may cite a research paper and treat the publication of it as gospel truth, after all what else would be the point of conducting a funded research if not to establish the facts. The problem arises when published work falls short of establishing the facts and instead creating falsehoods.
One of the main drivers of these falsehoods lies at the center of the research work, its funding. Academia is, by most if not all accounts, not a financially profitable endeavour, not to researchers at least (privately owned higher education institutions do garner a significant amount of wealth). This means that researchers must rely on grants and funding for their work. However, this becomes problematic as it creates a conflict of interest. By tainting the process the pursuit of truth becomes the pursuit of the perversion of the truth.
This is greatly exemplified by the research funded by Tobacco Companies in the United States spanning half a century that denied and downplayed the effects of smoking and secondhand smoke. This was an intentional assault on the truth and health sciences by using the very instruments that health sciences were built on. The truth did eventually catch on, many decades and many lives later.
A similar example was the case of former doctor Andrew Wakefield, who lost his medical license after publishing a paper claiming a link between the MMR vaccine and autism in children. It was later uncovered that his work was funded by lawyers who were planning on suing vaccine companies. This led to Wakefield falsifying evidence on an already small sample size of 12 children who had autism.
Although Wakefield’s license was revoked, his legacy endures in the anti-vax movement, which has bred vaccine hesitancy, which led to a measles outbreak in 2024.
The Erosion of Trust in Research
The consequence of the abuse of research work has been the erosion of trust in research work and by extension academia as a whole. The mistrust created by many bad actors has led to many doubting otherwise good research and for good reason. In the eyes of the public many may argue, if they lied about tobacco who's to say whatever evidence presented to them is factual?
This erosion of trust, however, creates massive consequences when we examine the impact and importance of research work. At a broader scale, research work is a source of information for various parts and institutions of society, and more importantly, for the government to work on. This can range from urban planning to feminist ideology. However, to effectively operate, society needs to buy in or at least have trust in the institutions that provide information. Once this trust is eroded, we get the anti-vax movement and climate change deniers. On the surface, this might not seem to be problematic, but when people holding these beliefs hold positions of power, the damage becomes far-reaching.
Conclusion
17th-century French philosopher René Descartes is credited with the long-enduring phrase, Cogito, ergo sum. I think, therefore I am. However, the first part of Descartes’ immortal first principle is often neglected. Dubito, meaning I doubt. For philosophical skeptics doubt forms the basis of all knowledge, and judgement should be suspended in the absence of overwhelming evidence.
This similar skepticism ought to then be applied to our consumption of research work. One should not be quick to dismiss or equally accept the facts and conclusions as they are presented. One must question sample sizes, funding sources, repeatability, peer review and many other factors that affect research work.
Whilst it might be seen as unfortunate that a piece of academic writing cannot be taken at face value, it must be remembered that not all fallacies in academia are malicious. For many centuries, western Europeans believed the sun to revolve around the Earth, not because they were evil but because the extent of their knowledge permitted that conclusion. It is therefore important to retain skepticism in all consumption of information, especially academic.
Let us know your thoughts. If you have burning thoughts or opinions to express, please feel free to reach out to us at larra@globalindiannetwork.com.
