1. STRATEGIES OF DISCOVERY
1.1 INTRODUCTION
○ Inquiry ~ Process whereby we gain knowledge
by observing how things are and thinking logically about what we observed.
○ Social World ~ The part of our existence dealing with how people interact
○ Science = A process of inquiry using logic, observation & theory
Logical (makes sense)
Has a reference ( observed evidence)
Gives a theory (explanation for what was observed)
○ Scientific research = Systematically examine & think about a question.
1.2 SOURCES OF GENERAL KNOWLEDGE
1.2.1 Tradition
○ We inherit a culture containing generally accepted knowledge
~ Knowledge is cumulative & we can learn from previous generations
BUT Can be led into falsehood:
○ Thinking traditionally → don‟t find out how the knowledge was obtained in the first place
→ Source of knowledge is not questioned
○ Every scientific discipline is based on a tradition of thought
1.2.2 Authority
○ Accepting something as true because of the status of the person who discovered the truth.
○ Can help ~ The expert probably has experience & knows what he is talking about
Can hinder ~ Can overestimate the person‟s expertise
Experts can be wrong.
1.2.3 Mysticism and religion
○ Religious knowledge is based on the authority of sacred texts
○ Religion can offer meaning, but is not a reliable guide to the literal state of the world
1.2.4 Common sense
○ Ordinary reasoning
○ Relates to what people know intuitively/instinctively
○ Helpful → In everyday life, making decisions & solving problems.
→ Covers topics everyone knows about & so helps communication
,BUT
~contains illogical reasoning
~ Doesn‟t - systematically consider how ideas are related to each other
- collect information systematically
~ Common sense often originates in tradition
1.2.5 Media myths
○ Mass media ~ Powerful influence on knowledge
~ Most people develop their knowledge from what they see, hear & read in the media
~ BUT its chief purpose is entertainment, not to accurately present reality
○ This leads to distorted information & errors
1.3 Errors in human inquiry and how scientists try to avoid them
1.3.1 Inaccurate observation
○ We need to know “what” before we can explain “why”
○ People tend to carelessness when observing everyday events
○ Scientific Observation ~ Contrasts with this in that it is a conscious activity
~ Deliberate
~ Both simple & complex measurement devices help prevent us from making
inaccurate observations.
1.3.2 Over-generalization
○ Arriving at a general conclusion about a thing when we have only observed a few cases of that thing.
○ Using a few events to arrive at a conclusion → means we ignore the possibility that observing more cases
may disprove our conclusion
○ Esp tempting when there is pressure to reach a conclusion
○ Halo-effect = Over-generalizing from one very good aspect of a thing
○ Scientific safeguards against overgeneralization ~ Sufficiently large samples of observations
~ Replication of inquiry
1.3.3 Selective observation
○ Tends to follow from over-generalization
○ Once you believe events follow a particular pattern, and you think you know why:
you tend to pay attention to situations that correspond to that pattern
& ignore/overlook situations that conflict with it.
p9
,○ Scientific safeguards against Selective Observation
~Using a research design that specifies the number & kind of observations needed
~ Conclusions are based on analysis of all the observations specified in the research design.
1.3.4 Ego involvement in understanding
○ We are personally involved in our research, & understanding has psychological significance.
○ Disproof of our understandings make us feel foolish.
○ This creates a barrier to objective further enquiry.
○ Scientific Safeguard against ego involvement ~ Testing of hypotheses in a systematic manner.
~ Making the research public enables evaluation by other scientists
1.3.5 The premature closure of inquiry
○ Tends to follow from the other errors
○ We stop inquiring before the evidence for sound conclusions is adequate.
(Before our understanding is complete)
○ Scientific Safeguards ~ Doing a thorough literature review:
- this reveals the scope & complexity of the topic.
However: Science is an open-ended enterprise, and conclusions are constantly modified.
1.4 Norms of the scientific community
○ Norms = Rules of conduct in particular situations, that are enforced by positive & negative sanctions
○ Norms in the scientific community:
1. Universalism → Research is to be judged purely on the basis of its scientific merit
(regardless of who conducted it or where it was done)
2. Organised Scepticism → All evidence should be challenged & questioned.
→ This ensures that research can stand up to examination.
3. Disinterestedness → Scientists must be neutral, impartial & open to unexpected observations/new ideas.
→ Should not be rigidly weeded to an idea or pov
→ Should accept, & look for, evidence that runs contrary to their views.
4. Communalism → Knowledge belongs to everyone & should be shared.
→ Creating scientific knowledge is a public act & the findings are public property
→ The way in which research was conducted must be described in detail
→ New knowledge is only formally accepted once it has been reviewed by other
researchers & it has been made publically available in a special form & style.
5. Honesty → Scientific honesty in all research is essential.
p12
, ○ These norms can be in conflict, in which case precedence must be given to one over another.
○ Norms are ideals of professional conduct → but researchers are influenced by various personal factors
○ Norms of science are sometimes violated → Esp if scientists become too closely involved in agendas
that go beyond the scientific field (financial/political interests)
(see p14 for discussion)
○ Scientists check on each other by:
- subjecting research reports to scrutiny by publishing them in academic books/journals
- Scientific community criticizes these reports, regardless of the status of the author
- admitting all knowledge is tentative, to be accepted only until disproved.
- condemning dishonesty in research.
○ For this to work it is necessary that:
- Scientists work in an environment where they have autonomy from outside control.
- All research results must see the light of day (this one is problematic)
- Scientists must be reflexive: Be aware of own assumptions
investigate own possible prejudices.
1.5 Stages in research
1.5.1 Stage 1: defining the problem
• research design or plan
• research problem
• literature review
• theory
• assumptions
• hypothesis
• research questions
1.5.2 Stage 2: obtaining the information
• sampling
• data collection
1.5.3 Stage 3: analyzing and interpreting information
• describing and interpreting quantitative data
• describing and interpreting qualitative data
1.5.4 Stage 4: communicating results
This involves writing the research report.
p16
1.1 INTRODUCTION
○ Inquiry ~ Process whereby we gain knowledge
by observing how things are and thinking logically about what we observed.
○ Social World ~ The part of our existence dealing with how people interact
○ Science = A process of inquiry using logic, observation & theory
Logical (makes sense)
Has a reference ( observed evidence)
Gives a theory (explanation for what was observed)
○ Scientific research = Systematically examine & think about a question.
1.2 SOURCES OF GENERAL KNOWLEDGE
1.2.1 Tradition
○ We inherit a culture containing generally accepted knowledge
~ Knowledge is cumulative & we can learn from previous generations
BUT Can be led into falsehood:
○ Thinking traditionally → don‟t find out how the knowledge was obtained in the first place
→ Source of knowledge is not questioned
○ Every scientific discipline is based on a tradition of thought
1.2.2 Authority
○ Accepting something as true because of the status of the person who discovered the truth.
○ Can help ~ The expert probably has experience & knows what he is talking about
Can hinder ~ Can overestimate the person‟s expertise
Experts can be wrong.
1.2.3 Mysticism and religion
○ Religious knowledge is based on the authority of sacred texts
○ Religion can offer meaning, but is not a reliable guide to the literal state of the world
1.2.4 Common sense
○ Ordinary reasoning
○ Relates to what people know intuitively/instinctively
○ Helpful → In everyday life, making decisions & solving problems.
→ Covers topics everyone knows about & so helps communication
,BUT
~contains illogical reasoning
~ Doesn‟t - systematically consider how ideas are related to each other
- collect information systematically
~ Common sense often originates in tradition
1.2.5 Media myths
○ Mass media ~ Powerful influence on knowledge
~ Most people develop their knowledge from what they see, hear & read in the media
~ BUT its chief purpose is entertainment, not to accurately present reality
○ This leads to distorted information & errors
1.3 Errors in human inquiry and how scientists try to avoid them
1.3.1 Inaccurate observation
○ We need to know “what” before we can explain “why”
○ People tend to carelessness when observing everyday events
○ Scientific Observation ~ Contrasts with this in that it is a conscious activity
~ Deliberate
~ Both simple & complex measurement devices help prevent us from making
inaccurate observations.
1.3.2 Over-generalization
○ Arriving at a general conclusion about a thing when we have only observed a few cases of that thing.
○ Using a few events to arrive at a conclusion → means we ignore the possibility that observing more cases
may disprove our conclusion
○ Esp tempting when there is pressure to reach a conclusion
○ Halo-effect = Over-generalizing from one very good aspect of a thing
○ Scientific safeguards against overgeneralization ~ Sufficiently large samples of observations
~ Replication of inquiry
1.3.3 Selective observation
○ Tends to follow from over-generalization
○ Once you believe events follow a particular pattern, and you think you know why:
you tend to pay attention to situations that correspond to that pattern
& ignore/overlook situations that conflict with it.
p9
,○ Scientific safeguards against Selective Observation
~Using a research design that specifies the number & kind of observations needed
~ Conclusions are based on analysis of all the observations specified in the research design.
1.3.4 Ego involvement in understanding
○ We are personally involved in our research, & understanding has psychological significance.
○ Disproof of our understandings make us feel foolish.
○ This creates a barrier to objective further enquiry.
○ Scientific Safeguard against ego involvement ~ Testing of hypotheses in a systematic manner.
~ Making the research public enables evaluation by other scientists
1.3.5 The premature closure of inquiry
○ Tends to follow from the other errors
○ We stop inquiring before the evidence for sound conclusions is adequate.
(Before our understanding is complete)
○ Scientific Safeguards ~ Doing a thorough literature review:
- this reveals the scope & complexity of the topic.
However: Science is an open-ended enterprise, and conclusions are constantly modified.
1.4 Norms of the scientific community
○ Norms = Rules of conduct in particular situations, that are enforced by positive & negative sanctions
○ Norms in the scientific community:
1. Universalism → Research is to be judged purely on the basis of its scientific merit
(regardless of who conducted it or where it was done)
2. Organised Scepticism → All evidence should be challenged & questioned.
→ This ensures that research can stand up to examination.
3. Disinterestedness → Scientists must be neutral, impartial & open to unexpected observations/new ideas.
→ Should not be rigidly weeded to an idea or pov
→ Should accept, & look for, evidence that runs contrary to their views.
4. Communalism → Knowledge belongs to everyone & should be shared.
→ Creating scientific knowledge is a public act & the findings are public property
→ The way in which research was conducted must be described in detail
→ New knowledge is only formally accepted once it has been reviewed by other
researchers & it has been made publically available in a special form & style.
5. Honesty → Scientific honesty in all research is essential.
p12
, ○ These norms can be in conflict, in which case precedence must be given to one over another.
○ Norms are ideals of professional conduct → but researchers are influenced by various personal factors
○ Norms of science are sometimes violated → Esp if scientists become too closely involved in agendas
that go beyond the scientific field (financial/political interests)
(see p14 for discussion)
○ Scientists check on each other by:
- subjecting research reports to scrutiny by publishing them in academic books/journals
- Scientific community criticizes these reports, regardless of the status of the author
- admitting all knowledge is tentative, to be accepted only until disproved.
- condemning dishonesty in research.
○ For this to work it is necessary that:
- Scientists work in an environment where they have autonomy from outside control.
- All research results must see the light of day (this one is problematic)
- Scientists must be reflexive: Be aware of own assumptions
investigate own possible prejudices.
1.5 Stages in research
1.5.1 Stage 1: defining the problem
• research design or plan
• research problem
• literature review
• theory
• assumptions
• hypothesis
• research questions
1.5.2 Stage 2: obtaining the information
• sampling
• data collection
1.5.3 Stage 3: analyzing and interpreting information
• describing and interpreting quantitative data
• describing and interpreting qualitative data
1.5.4 Stage 4: communicating results
This involves writing the research report.
p16
