Abstract
New discoveries and theories are crucial for the development of science, but they are often initially resisted by the scientific community. This paper analyses resistance to scientific discoveries that supplement previous research results or conclusions with new phenomena, such as long chains in macromolecules, Alfvén waves, parity nonconservation in weak interactions and quasicrystals. Construal-level theory is used to explain that the probability of new discoveries may be underestimated because of psychological distance. Thus, the insufficiently examined scope of an accepted theory may lead to overstating the suitable scope and underestimating the probability of its undiscovered counter-examples. Therefore, psychological activity can result in people instinctively resisting new discoveries. Direct evidence can help people judge the validity of a hypothesis with rational thinking. The effects of authorities and textbooks on the resistance to discoveries are also discussed. From the results of our analysis, suggestions are provided to reduce resistance to real discoveries, which will benefit the development of science.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alfvén, H. (1942). Existence of electromagnetic-hydrodynamic waves. Nature, 150(3805), 405–406.
Barber, B. (1961). Resistance by scientists to scientific discovery. Science, 134(347), 596–602.
Bindi, L., Steinhardt, P. J., Yao, N., & Lu, P. J. (2009). Natural quasicrystals. Science, 324(5932), 1306–1309.
Campanario, J. M. (2009). Rejecting and resisting Nobel class discoveries: Accounts by Nobel Laureates. Scientometrics, 81(2), 549–565.
Fälthammar, C.-G. (1997). Plasma physics from laboratory to cosmos—the life and achievements of Hannes Alfvén. IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science, 25(3), 409–414.
Förster, J., Friedman, R. S., & Liberman, N. (2004). Temporal construal effects on abstract and concrete thinking: Consequences for insight and creative cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(2), 177–189.
Förster, J., Liberman, N., & Shapira, O. (2009). Preparing for novel versus familiar events: Shifts in global and local processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138(3), 383–399.
Garfield, E. (1980). Premature discovery or delayed recognition—why? Current Contents, 21, 5–10.
Garfield, E. (1989). Delayed recognition in scientific discovery: Citation frequency analysis aids the search for case histories. Current Contents, 23, 3–9.
Lee, T. D., & Yang, C. N. (1956). Question of parity conservation in weak interactions. Physical Review, 104(1), 254–258.
Liberman, N., Trope, Y., McCrea, S. M., & Sherman, S. J. (2007). The effect of level of construal on the temporal distance of activity enactment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43(1), 143–149.
Okun, L. B. (2007). Mirror particles and mirror matter: 50 years of speculation and searching. Physics-Uspekhi, 50(4), 380–389.
Shechtman, D., Blech, I., Gratias, D., & Cahn, J. W. (1984). Metallic phase with long-range orientational order and no translational symmetry. Physical Review Letters, 53(20), 1951–1954.
Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2010). Construal-level theory of psychological distance. Psychological Review, 117(2), 440–463.
Wakslak, C., & Trope, Y. (2009). The effect of construal-level on subjective probability estimates. Psychological Science, 20(1), 52–58.
Wróblewski, A. K. (2008). The downfall of parity—the revolution that happened fifty years ago. Acta Physica Polonica B, 39(2), 251–264.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Fang, H. An Explanation of Resisted Discoveries Based on Construal-Level Theory. Sci Eng Ethics 21, 41–50 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-013-9512-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-013-9512-x