BASIC RESEARCH VERSUS APPLIED RESEARCH
Have you ever wondered how far a penguin can poo? Well I can tell you the answer is 40cm. Another fact for you, lap dancers earn more tips when they’re ovulating!!!! These facts, although funny, are not even that interesting, and some might say that they are pointless (although I’m sure the all male research team that discovered the latter would disagree). What possible benefit is there to society from these findings?……I can’t think of any!!!!! What is interesting is that your tax contributions probably paid for these research findings and many other ‘pointless’ research findings out there.
Basic Research versus Applied Research is an area of much controversy. Basic research, which is also referred to as pure research is driven by curiosity and interest, and it is what drives scientists, researchers and us – future psychologists! We seek knowledge and understanding, and basic research is motivated by this. Consider the following questions; How did the earth begin? How does environment determine who we are? How does genetics determine who we are? These are all examples of questions derived from curiosity and interest, and it also is the type of questions basic research address. Outcome and findings for these examples as we can imagine are invaluable and is a stepping stone to further applied research. BUT, the first facts stated in the first paragraph of this blog are also examples of basic research! Ask most scientists, and they will agree that a basic understanding of all science is necessary for progress. It is argued that basic research is the foundation for applied science, and this foundation is necessary and must take place initially for expansion.
Applied research is more relevant to our modern world. Its main goal is to make the world a better place – for the human race ( had to state this, as lets face it, as humans we are selfish and put our own needs before those of other creatures). Applied research focuses on solving problems, rather than just aquiring knowledge as basic research does. It addresses such questions as; which treatment is best for breast cancer? cure for cancer? Alternative heating solutions to decrease pollution. Vaccinations and antibiotics are the result of applied research, these were exceptional research findings that has resulted in millions (probably billions) of lives being saved. Many scientist believe that too much money is wasted on basic research, and there should be some intervention to direct funding towards applied research. And the government agrees, as they are preparing to ‘crack down’ on irrelevant reasearch, and funding will be provided depending on possible impact of the research. Some scientists and academics are against these plans, stating that invaluable findings we have now are because of basic research. And as Dr Smoot of LBNL would argue “People can not see the future well enough to predict what’s going to develop from basic research. If we only did applied research, we would still be making better spears.”
In conclusion to this blog, I believe that there are many problems facing the world currently, such as pollution, war, illness and so on, and a shift should take place in ensuring that government funding (tax payers contribution) is directed to applied research, so that hopefully a solution is found. Considering this, basic research and applied research work together, and the initial foundation that some basic research provides is and has been invaluable. It has been vital for advancement of scientific knowledge. I also believe that government plans to crack down and only fund research in consideration of possible impact of findings is the right track to take, and hopefully there will be strict guidelines for these fundings, but also an open mind for all possible findings that can be found from the research (although I also agree with what, Dr Smoot says………but someone has to draw the line). Gregor Mendel conducted basic research studying pea plants, which who would have thought then provided us with the knowledge and understanding we have about Genetics and DNA, whoever has the final decision in reference to funding allocation should have George Mendel tattooed on their hand as a reminder 😉 We dont want to miss out on such findings, but an end is needed for waste of time and pointless research – I don’t think that how far a penguin can poo will ever lead us to extraoridinary life saving findings :-).
prpfe76 
The sudden plethora of completely useless research has caught my eye with the increase in internet surfing, and I am definitely one of those people who believe that too much of the taxpayer’s money is wasted on basic research! As much as I like penguins, what use is it for me or anyone else how far they can poo!? And what bemuses me is what use was it for the researcher to research such a thing!? Applied research on the other hand is largely contributing to the world; it’s based on practical problems that exist in the modern world and emphasises on proper scientific methods that seeks to solve practical problems.
Bearing in mind that some basic research have substantially contributed to the world, and some would say that it lays down the foundation for applied research I cannot see how some of the researches can be justified, let alone be funded by taxpayers….some of these include, ‘why woodpeckers don’t get headaches’, ‘digital rectal massage is the cure for hiccups’ etc…
At the beginning of February The Telegraph proposed that the government was to ‘crack down’ on basic research, it is ludicrous that the government has taken so long to realise the complete and utter nonsense of some basic research going on in the world, funded by taxpayers. To me, it seems that the government and the researchers who conducted these ridiculous studies were from a different planet to me, and finally they have realised that our money is being wasted! All basic research studies that are funded by the taxpayers should have strict guidelines and a substantial and concrete reason, and possible outcome in order to get the go-ahead to conduct their research. Basic research is indeed living up to its nickname of ‘silly science’.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/6223831/Pointless-research-top-10-Ig-Nobel-award-winners-for-silly-science.html
I like how u started your blog with a few ‘pointless’ facts, it grabbed my attention straight away!! I also like how you looked at the positives for both types of research. I agree that funding for research should be more selective as it is the taxpayers’ money at work!! I think research into possible cures for cancer other fatal disorders should be a priority over research which leaves us with nothing more than an amusing fact but at the same time questions such as how did the earth begin? are extremely interesting and shouldn’t be tossed aside completely. Overall I think that the process should be more selective (funding-wise) but not cast basic research aside as ‘less than’ applied research.
(Really enjoyed this blog!! It was a nice read 🙂 )