actually lead to more offending behavior. The intervention increases the odds of offending by between 1.6 to 1 and 1.7 to 1. Government officials permitting this program need to adopt rigorous evaluation efforts to ensure that they are not causing more harm to the very citizens they pledge to protect. (Petrosino, Turpin-Petrosino, Hollis-Peel, & Lavenberg, 2013)
In Figure 1.2, you can see a graphic depiction of how pseudoscience sometimes convinces people of the credibility of a practice that does not deserve it.
What should you do if you see a claim about a practice that might be based on pseudoscience? You should find evidence with regard to the approach that you see advocated. A quick review of literature databases can reveal if there is such evidence and what the evidence shows. If you fail to find evidence, this should not be interpreted to mean that a given service is not effective. But if there is no evidence, why should you embrace it in view of the fact there are likely many alternatives that have been subjected to scientific testing? And, of course, if there have been a lot of studies with consistent negative findings, you should see this as clear evidence that this is not a good approach to service.
Figure 1.2 ■ Making the Felonious Case for Scared Straight
Keep in mind that science relies on relevant facts, objectively reviewed, on a carefully articulated question. You can review evidence about a particular question through a review of literature databases that will show you articles that have examined the particular question scientifically.
Applying the Basic Principles of Science: Does the Full Moon Make Us Different?
Let’s employ our learning about these principles with regard to a research question. This is an example that was presented in another text (York, 1997). We will use one that is simple and may even be fun. Have you ever heard someone say “It must be the full moon” when they witness strange behavior? When this author asked whether the full moon affects the behavior of mental health clients, he often received an affirmative response from social workers and others. Many people are convinced that the full moon has such an effect.
Let’s suppose that we have decided to conduct a study to see if this proposition is true. We will go through the research process to examine it. We will examine the knowledge base currently available to decide where to go from there. If the question has already been well answered by existing research, we will conclude that another study is not necessary; so we will stop our inquiry there.
What is the purpose of our study? Which is the better way to state our purpose given the spirit of scientific inquiry?
1 To prove that the full moon causes unusual behavior
2 To demonstrate that there is more strange behavior during the full moon than when the moon is not full
3 To determine if there is more strange behavior during the full moon than when the moon is not full
4 To prove that the full moon is not related to unusual behavior
What is your choice? If you choose the first one or the last one, you will clearly find yourself outside the bounds of the spirit of scientific inquiry. Remember that science is a method of finding out rather than a method of proving a point. If you choose the second one, you will make the same mistake. If your purpose is to demonstrate that something is true, you are not speaking according to the spirit of scientific inquiry. So this leaves the third option, which is consistent with the spirit of scientific inquiry.
If we seek to prove a point, we will naturally fall into various traps that will hamper our pursuit of knowledge about the subject. Remember that research is a process of discovery, not justification. We should engage in a process of inquiry that is designed to provide an objective appraisal of our research subject. The reduction of the potential of human bias is key to accomplishing this. So our first principle of science is as follows: Scientific research is a process of finding out, not a process of justification.
Another principle that undergirds the scientific method is that you should not reinvent the wheel. This means that you should start your inquiry with a review of what is already known about your research question. In our review of the question about the full moon and strange behavior, we found that there have been a great number of studies undertaken.
So do we need to engage in another one? Maybe but only if the existing research has left some point of the debate uncovered. If you search enough, you will usually find a special aspect of your inquiry that has not yet been fully investigated. The main point here is not to discourage the continued pursuit of a theme but to find what is already known, so that you can couch your inquiry in a manner that is more likely to add to our existing knowledge base.
There have been numerous studies on this question. One such study was conducted on attempted suicides (Mathew, Lindsay, Shanmjganatan, & Eapen, 1991). The records of the Accident and Emergency Department of a large urban hospital were examined to determine if the rate of suicide attempts that came to the attention of this hospital was different during the full moon and at other times. The number of suicides attempted for each day of 1 month were recorded. The full moon fell on Day 15. On that day, a total of 19 suicide attempts were recorded. The largest number of suicide attempts (23) were recorded on Days 3 and 17, one of which was close to the full moon, but the other was at a great distance from it. The number of attempts on the day of the full moon was slightly higher than the average for the entire month, but the difference was determined to be nonsignificant (statistically). When we examine this question, we might also want to compare the 3 days when the moon was at its fullest with the 3 days when it was the least full. If the full moon causes suicide, we would expect the 3 days of the full moon to have a significantly higher suicide rate. For the data from this study, the average number of suicide attempts during the full moon period was 18 as compared with 17 for the new moon period (the 3 days during which the moon is the least full). You would probably conclude that this difference was not significant; therefore, the rate of suicides close to the full moon was not different from the rate when the moon was the least full.
So what do you think? Are you yet convinced that the full moon does not affect behavior, or do you believe that there is a need for further review of the literature?
I hope you said that there is a need for further review of the literature. Why? This is only one study that addressed only one type of behavior (suicide). Maybe the full moon affects mental health in some way other than suicide.
So let’s assume that you said there is a need for further review of the research on this theme. In one such study, a set of researchers examined the records of a psychiatric hospital to determine if dangerous behavior of patients was more prevalent during the full moon than at other times. Dangerous behavior was defined as “erratic behavior which was assessed by qualified mental health professionals as dangerous to self or others to the extent that isolation (seclusion) or restraints were necessary to prevent harm to self or others” (Durm, Terry, & Hammonds, 1986, p. 988). Data for 3 years (1982, 1983, and 1984) were collected. The average number of such incidents of dangerous behavior was actually higher (13.17 per day) during the period when the moon was not full than it was during the period of the full moon (11.61 per day). So these data clearly did not support the idea that the full moon makes people different.
Well, where are you now? Are you ready to conclude that the full moon does not affect behavior? Or are you prepared to review additional studies? I would be inclined to review additional studies because there are so many other aspects of behavior that might be influenced by the full moon.
If
