Scientific literacy: Clear as mud.
TL;DR: It's not surprising that some academic papers seem to swim before the authors' eyes — the scientific literature has become steadily less accessible over the past half-century, asks Jonathan Knight.
Abstract: It's not surprising that some academic papers seem to swim before our eyes — the scientific literature has become steadily less accessible over the past half-century. Can we stop this trend, asks Jonathan Knight.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: The authors define generic qualitative approaches, including the descriptive qualitative approach and interpretive description subcategories, and outline key critiques of generic studies present in the literature, describes the benefits of generic approaches, and suggests ways in which the issues raised in critiques might be mediated.
Abstract: Generic qualitative research studies are those that refuse to claim allegiance to a single established methodology. There has been significant debate in the qualitative literature regarding the extent to which rigour can be preserved outside of the guidelines of an established methodology. This article offers a starting place for researchers interested in entering the literature on generic qualitative approaches and offers some guidance to help researchers appreciate the advantages of using a generic approach and navigate the potential pitfalls. Given that generic approaches are, by definition, less defined and established, this article begins by defining generic qualitative approaches, including the descriptive qualitative approach and interpretive description subcategories. It then outlines key critiques of generic studies present in the literature, describes the benefits of generic approaches, and suggests ways in which the issues raised in critiques might be mediated.
411 citations
TL;DR: The most commonly applied strategies were use of a sampling rationale (67%), analyst triangulation (59%), and mention of methodological limitations (56%); the least common were negative or deviant case analysis (8%), external audit (7%), and specification of ontology (6%).
Abstract: This study was conducted to describe strategies used by social work researchers to enhance the rigor of their qualitative work A template was developed and used to review a random sample of 100 articles drawn from social work journals listed in the 2005 Journal Citation Reports: Science and Social Sciences Edition Results suggest that the most commonly applied strategies were use of a sampling rationale (67%), analyst triangulation (59%), and mention of methodological limitations (56%); the least common were negative or deviant case analysis (8%), external audit (7%), and specification of ontology (6%) Of eight key criteria, researchers used an average of 20 (SD = 15); however, the number used increased significantly between 2003 and 2008The authors suggest that for this trend to continue, social work educators, journal editors, and researchers must reinforce the judicious application of strategies for enhancing the rigor of qualitative work KEY WORDS: qualitative methods; research methods; rigor; social work research ********** The social nature of inquiry is an ongoing challenge to the production of good research in social work As the positivist belief in the potential objectivity of social work research has come into question, researchers using a range of paradigms have recognized the pervasive effects of human limitations and subjectivity This has motivated some postpositivist researchers to carefully design their studies, using quantitative methods to minimize "bias" or "subjectivity" Over time, these efforts have become standardized as criteria to ensure the rigor of the work In a postpositivist framework, these would be described as standards for establishing reliability and validity (Padgett, 2004) As social research using qualitative methods has moved beyond anthropology and into the social sciences, researchers have had to grapple with the meanings of terms such as "objectivity," "reliability," and "validity" (among others) in a completely new context--one that insists on recognition of the interactive dimension of social inquiry How can social work researchers using qualitative methods produce credible work when objectivity is no longer assumed or even pursued (Kincheloe, 2001; Padgett, 2004; Rolfe, 2004)? Sometimes referred to as "criteriology," this question has been a conundrum for qualitative researchers for at least three decades It has given rise to a substantial body of literature on criteria: whether they are needed, what they should be called, how and when they should be implemented, and whether they can be used to evaluate the quality of the work (Caelli, Ray, & Mill, 2003; Davies & Dodd, 2002; Emden & Sandelowski, 1998, 1999; Kincheloe, 2001; Marshall, 1989; Rolfe, 2004, Seale, 1999, 2002;Whittemore, Chase, & Mandle, 2001) We discuss the main points of this literature here as background to the present study Dialogue about criteria started in the early 1980s as qualitative methods became more visible in the social sciences (LeCompte & Goetz, 1982; Lincoln, 1995; Lincoln & Guba, 1985) Early discussions about criteria, such as Kirk and Miller's (1986) Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research, were based on postpositivist research assumptions Lincoln and Guba proposed criteria based on the terms "credibility," "transferability," "dependability," and "confirmability," which were based on the postpositivist concepts of internal validity, external validity, reliability, and objectivity Lincoln (1995) rightly calls these early efforts, including her own, "foundationalist": "These criteria rested in assumptions that had been developed for an empiricist philosophy of research, and spoke to the procedural and methodological concerns that characterize empiricist and post-empiricist research" (p 276) Although some objected to the use of these parallel terms, they did offer a useful vocabulary for qualitative researchers to speak about their work with those unfamiliar with qualitative methods and perspectives …
298 citations
TL;DR: Qualitative approaches are explored and then “best practice” for generic qualitative research is focused on.
Abstract: The frequency of qualitative studies in the Emergency Medicine Journal, while still low, has increased over the last few years. All take a generic approach and rarely conform to established qualitative approaches such as phenomenology, ethnography and grounded theory. This generic approach is no doubt selected for pragmatic reasons but can be weakened by a lack of rigor and understanding of qualitative research. This paper explores qualitative approaches and then focuses on “best practice” for generic qualitative research.
181 citations
TL;DR: It is shown that the readability of science is steadily decreasing, and the analyses show that this trend is indicative of a growing use of general scientific jargon.
Abstract: Clarity and accuracy of reporting are fundamental to the scientific process. Readability formulas can estimate how difficult a text is to read. Here, in a corpus consisting of 709,577 abstracts published between 1881 and 2015 from 123 scientific journals, we show that the readability of science is steadily decreasing. Our analyses show that this trend is indicative of a growing use of general scientific jargon. These results are concerning for scientists and for the wider public, as they impact both the reproducibility and accessibility of research findings.
127 citations
Cites background from "Scientific literacy: Clear as mud."
...While science is complex, and some jargon is unavoidable (Knight, 2003), this does not justify the continuing trend that we have shown....
[...]
...While science is complex, and some jargon is unavoidable (25), this does not justify the continuing trend that we have shown....
[...]
TL;DR: In this article, the authors compared the distance and magnitude of the Yogyakarta earthquake with the relationship between historical earthquakes that have caused sediment liquefaction, or triggered the eruption of mud volcanoes or caused other hydrological responses.
123 citations
References
More filters
Book•
01 Jan 1971
1,303 citations
"Scientific literacy: Clear as mud." refers methods in this paper
...The scale is based on the American Heritage Word Frequency Book...
[...]
Journal Article•
TL;DR: The authors argue that complexity of thought need not lead to impenetrability of expression, and demonstrate a number of rhetorical principles that can produce clarity in communication without oversimplifying scientific issues.
Abstract: Science is often hard to read Most people assume that its difficulties are born out of necessity, out of the extreme complexity of scientific concepts, data and analysis We argue here that complexity of thought need not lead to impenetrability of expression; we demonstrate a number of rhetorical principles that can produce clarity in communication without oversimplifying scientific issues The results are substantive, not merely cosmetic: Improving the quality of writing actually improves the quality of thought
210 citations
TL;DR: For instance, the authors pointed out that science has become more difficult for nonspecialists to understand than it used to be, and pointed out the extent of the difficulty in understanding it.
Abstract: That science has become more difficult for nonspecialists to understand is a truth universally acknowledged. Here is a measure of the extent of the process.
68 citations