Ellen Langer

A Mismatch of Theory and Evidence ·

|

Last week I was visiting a friend who was telling me about a trip to India that she and her friends took many years ago. They met a guru and asked a bystander to take a picture of them with him. Two pictures were taken, using two different cameras. When they got home and developed the film—digital cameras didn’t yet exist—they found themselves in the photos but the guru was missing. How could this be? When we can’t explain a phenomena, we dismiss it out of hand and that’s what many people who see the pictures do. Interestingly, they often accept without question other phenomena that they also can’t explain.

When we’re faced with findings that our theories can’t accommodate, we too often throw out the data. The other alternative, of course, is to abandon the theory, but we don’t often let go of the mindsets that attach to theory. Scientists are no different from the general public in our mindless adherence to long-standing views. Eventually, there may be a paradigm shift when the evidence for a new view becomes overwhelming, but much progress may be lost in the wait. No amount of evidence for example, for some “paranormal” phenomena, would currently be accepted by most scientists. My own research teeters at times on the edge of believability for some, when it shows that if we change our mindset our body changes accordingly. Publishing in leading journals helps gain acceptance. While I’ve taken this approach, it often means dealing with reviewers who also are stuck in soon-to-be outdated theories.

We need to open our minds to possibility. Who knows what could be in store for us if we do. I personally have no desire to disappear from photos, although looking thinner than I may be would be a nice alternative.

Comment

refreshing!

Preet · Jul 18, 11:24 PM

I’m curious as to how you deal with ‘reviewers…stuck in soon-to-be-outdated theories’.
Are there tactics to helping them expand their way of thinking?
I think I have the same reviewers in the commercial world!

NT · Jul 27, 03:22 PM

Dr. Langer mentions similar things in the first chapter of Counterclockwise. Her thoughts resonate with my own experience about 15 years ago doing research in ecology. My colleagues and professors routinely criticized my work on the basis of the ‘traditional’ ways in which they did research. Later, when I presented my work at an international conference, I won an award for it! The very things that upset my colleagues (spatial autocorrelation) were INTERESTING to my colleagues at the conference (hmmm, why ARE these things autocorrelated?).

It was an eye-opener.

Joe · Aug 23, 09:37 AM

Nice post…

Term papers · Dec 17, 02:39 AM

Thank you for great article. Where else could anyone get that kind of information in such a perfect way of presentation. I like it and I think you make a good point. Thanks for taking the time to share this with us.

Term papers · Jan 5, 02:07 AM

Commenting is closed for this article.