Social Research Versus Ordinary Ways of Knowing

As political comedians sometimes show, even the most “boring” news story can be made interesting—and possibly fun—depending on how you view it. Listening to the news can be valuable for the information one acquires, but it can be more edifying and entertaining to try to see through the apparently factual claims made by reporters, government officials, pundits, activists, and other commentators. By keeping in mind the idea that the truth is (almost) never exactly what someone claims it to be, news can be seen as a biased argument rather than an impartial description of reality. Somewhat similarly, it is possible to bring an irreverent attitude to social science journal articles. The standard article contains a lot of news but almost no entertainment value, at least on the surface. What’s needed is for the reader to bring the right attitude to these scholarly works. A strong sense of irony—and the ability to ask the right questions—can help deflate even the most authoritative, statistic-laden, peer-reviewed publication. How to Critique Journal Articles in the Social Sciences is not a jokebook, though. Its purpose is to help readers appreciate the rigor and complexity of social research while reducing the intimidation factor. When students understand in detail the inevitable frailty of most research, they are more likely to consider themselves worthy to enter into dialogue and debate with journal articles and even to attempt social research themselves. If this involves having a good laugh at authors’ expense, so be it. (As long as we remember that our own claims may potentially be as problematic as others’ claims, we’re on relatively safe ground.) After reading this book and practicing its exercises, any reasonably intelligent person should be able to challenge the wall of facts that social