科学家研究的本质可以帮助解释为什么许多科学家在分析相同的数据时可以得出不同的结论。当一个科学家着手进行一项实验时，他们通常心中有一个目标。无论他们是在试图证明一个理论的正确性，还是在进行一项新的发现，科学家们往往对他们的实验所涉及的主题有先入为主的想法。在其他情况下，科学家得到了投资者的财政支持，他们希望科学家能得出某些结论，特别是在药物方面，投资者希望创造一种新药来盈利。正因为如此，科学家在进行实验时往往会有偏见。这导致他们以一种支持他们目标的方式分析数据。他们往往会忽视或分配与他们试图支持的主张相矛盾的不重要的价值数据。这通常是科学家在分析相同数据时产生分歧的根源。每天，历史学家和科学家都在分析无可争议的事实。他们看着这些事实，得出完全不同的结论。作为人类，我们都要通过文化和个人经历的主观视角来解读事实。尽管历史和科学领域的专家可能会尽量保持客观，但这些领域研究的某些要素需要主观分析，而这些分析可能因专家而异。这就导致了科学和历史领域的专家们得出不同的结论，而且一般来说，在某个领域的专家们尽管接触到了相同的事实却意见不一。
新西兰代写留学生论文:科学家研究的本质
The nature of a scientist’s research can help explain why many scientists can come to different conclusions when analyzing the same data. When a scientist sets out to conduct an experiment, they often have a goal in mind. Whether they are trying to prove a theory correct or make a new discovery, scientists often have preconceived ideas about the topic of which their experiment is concerned. In other cases, scientists are being supported financially by investors who are looking for the scientists to come to certain conclusions, especially in relation to medicines where investors are looking to create a new drug in order to make a profit. Because of this, scientists often have biases when conducting experiments. This leads to them analyzing data in a way that will support their goals. They will often disregard or assign insignificant value data that contradicts the claim they are trying to support. This is generally the source of disagreement between scientists when analyzing the same data.Every day, historians and scientists alike are analyzing undisputable facts. They look at these facts and come to completely separate conclusions. As human beings, we all are subject to interpreting facts through the subjective lenses of our cultures and personal experiences. Although experts in both the fields of history and science may try to be objective as possible, certain elements of research in these fields require subjective analysis that can vary from expert to expert. This gives way to differing conclusions among experts in the fields of science and history and, in general, disagreements between experts in a certain field despite having access to the same facts.
