The scientific method

The current coronavirus pandemic has exposed the world to scientific knowledge in a way that has not been done before. We all have theories, answers and even questions regarding the virus, the vaccine, infection rates, quarantine rules and so much more. But amongst it all, there has been a stark rise in the spread of misinformation and science communication has lagged in correcting the myths. One reason for this is that science can sometimes feel inaccessible to those outside of the field; from technical terms to multiple abbreviations, it is easy to feel overwhelmed by the multitude and complexity of scientific information. Understanding the foundation of how scientists understand the world can help breakdown some of the barriers to science.

The scientific method is simply a way to find answers and solve problems. The procedure involves making observations of the world around us, formulating hypotheses, designing experiments to test the hypotheses, and drawing a conclusion. This approach to knowledge explains why sometimes scientific knowledge changes. Science is not a fixed body of knowledge; it is more of a way of understanding the world. A traditional scientific method consists of 5 key steps:

• Observation
• Hypothesis
• Experiment
• Analysis
• Conclusion

Observation is key in the process of acquiring knowledge. As we observe, we classify what we see, and look for patterns to help formulate a hypothesis. Observations can be qualitative, whereby they do not rely on numbers. They can also be quantitative and are often a mixture of both and the essential part is that they lead to a question that we can test. A recent example is when COVID-19 first started, our first understanding of the virus came from what we were observing in people that were infected. We first thought that young people were safer from the virus mainly because it was primarily affected older people. Another observation was that the disease was more severe in Black and Ethnic minority patients. Scientists then began to try and understand why it only affected certain people more. Similarly, scientists were able to have a vaccine for the coronavirus firstly by observing the virus. The first step to creating the vaccine began by looking at the virus’ genome and understanding how the virus attacked the body to make us sick.

Observations are followed by hypotheses. Hypotheses are made to test the patterns we saw during the observation stage and help better understand what we see around us. It is essentially a conclusion of what we observed, and it can be broad or specific depending on the observation. It offers a possible and not always right answer based on our observation and one that we can test. As we observed the coronavirus, considering the previous knowledge available, the observations showed that the virus caused flu like symptoms and just like other coronaviruses it spreads person to person. From that, we could hypothesise that the COVID-19 is transmitted through air droplets.

Experiments test to see if what we hypothesised correlates to what happens in real life. They include an independent variable (one that can change) and a dependent variable, one that is measured. For example, if testing for a vaccine, an independent variable could be age and the dependent variable would be the vaccine. This way, we can see how the vaccine interacts with people of different ages. Results are recorded at each part of the experimental stage; we analyse the results to help us reach a conclusion. A good experiment is one that is reproducible so that it we can eliminate chance and personal bias to the best of our ability. An experiment that cannot be repeated many times to produce the same results, scientifically, makes a bad experiment. It shows that there is a flaw somewhere in the scientific process.

The analysis of the data helps us to understand what the results of the experiment means. We can use statistical data to categorise the results and to draw relationships between the data sets. The analysis step is used in communicating findings to other scientists and later to the general public; it helps us understand the initial observations made and conclude whether the hypothesis was correct or not. After looking at the data from multiple experiments, we can conclude our findings to shape our understanding.

The conclusion looks at the whole process. It is here where we decide whether our hypothesis was right or wrong. There is no correct answer, and the strength of a conclusion is based on how we communicate the results and reflect on our work. The conclusion summarises the scientific process of knowledge and is shared widely to inform people.

The spread of misinformation especially in the light of the current pandemic is not always because there is an inherent mistrust of science, but simply because people do not understand the process. Scientists are often giving the space to do their research, repeat experiment over time before reaching a conclusion that becomes available to the public. This pandemic has taken away that privilege to a certain extent. The scientific method allows for scientists to make mistakes, change their mind, draw a hypothesis, and reject it based on the results. When the public are not familiar with how we approach knowledge scientifically, it can seem as if there are multiple contradictions occurring at the same time, when it is just the process.