Psychology is the social science most closely associated with experimental methods. However, this apparent close alignment with the natural sciences has not led to a cumulative body of established results, and the failure of many prominent studies to replicate has raised serious question about the validity existing research. Based on qualitative field research observing research practice, Peterson argues that research look fundamentally different in molecular biology and psychology labs. The former tends to focus is on better ‘bench-building’, or continuous improvements in data collection and research practices, where new technology opens new avenues for experimentation. By contrast, psychology labs often focus on theories in vogue, identifying salient contributions, with a premium for ‘counterintuitive’ findings, how to best pitch results from an experiment, often based on what is statistically significant rather than what originally motivated a study. This book suggests that more emphasis on ‘bench building’ could lead to stronger research in the social sciences. However, as a sociologist and outsider, Peterson is less specific on what bench building could look like in psychology and is not fully prepared to question the common tenet in science and technology studies that practice is simply different across fields, without one being inherently ‘better’, and offer stronger practical recommendations. Experiments are increasingly prominent in other sciences and conflict research, and this thoughtful book provides important insights for reflection, beyond its focus on psychology.