以工具为基础的科学的陷阱和以问题为中心的科学的希望

Patrick E. McKnight, M. Johns, P. McGovern, Julius Najab
{"title":"以工具为基础的科学的陷阱和以问题为中心的科学的希望","authors":"Patrick E. McKnight, M. Johns, P. McGovern, Julius Najab","doi":"10.2458/V1I2.99","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Our present social sciences are at risk of losing sight of their primary purpose: the goal of reducing uncertainty. For years social scientists have drifted slowly toward the routine of employing of accepted methodological, conceptual, and analytical tools rather than engaging in problem oriented inquiry. Scientific contributions are reviewed in accordance to their compliance with the routine application of tools rather than focusing on their ability to problem-solve for a wider population. Researchers in every area of psychology for instance now insist on using methods such as random assignment and control groups, as well as data analytic procedures such as null hypothesis significance testing without regard to their relevance. A problem-focused inquiry would not dictate the routine use of any particular tool but rather the judicious application of tools when deemed appropriate. The following article describes  the current situation in the framework contrasting toolbased and problem-focused inquiry and offers several insights that may create a more balanced and fruitful approach to scientific inquiry. DOI:10.2458/azu_jmmss_v1i2_mcknight","PeriodicalId":90602,"journal":{"name":"Journal of methods and measurement in the social sciences","volume":"1 1","pages":"1-14"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Pitfalls of a Tool-based Science and the Promise of a Problem-focused Science\",\"authors\":\"Patrick E. McKnight, M. Johns, P. McGovern, Julius Najab\",\"doi\":\"10.2458/V1I2.99\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Our present social sciences are at risk of losing sight of their primary purpose: the goal of reducing uncertainty. For years social scientists have drifted slowly toward the routine of employing of accepted methodological, conceptual, and analytical tools rather than engaging in problem oriented inquiry. Scientific contributions are reviewed in accordance to their compliance with the routine application of tools rather than focusing on their ability to problem-solve for a wider population. Researchers in every area of psychology for instance now insist on using methods such as random assignment and control groups, as well as data analytic procedures such as null hypothesis significance testing without regard to their relevance. A problem-focused inquiry would not dictate the routine use of any particular tool but rather the judicious application of tools when deemed appropriate. The following article describes  the current situation in the framework contrasting toolbased and problem-focused inquiry and offers several insights that may create a more balanced and fruitful approach to scientific inquiry. DOI:10.2458/azu_jmmss_v1i2_mcknight\",\"PeriodicalId\":90602,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of methods and measurement in the social sciences\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"1-14\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-05-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of methods and measurement in the social sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2458/V1I2.99\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of methods and measurement in the social sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2458/V1I2.99","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

我们目前的社会科学正面临着失去其主要目的的风险:减少不确定性的目标。多年来,社会科学家慢慢地倾向于使用公认的方法、概念和分析工具,而不是从事面向问题的调查。科学贡献是根据它们是否符合工具的常规应用来审查的,而不是集中在它们为更广泛的人群解决问题的能力上。例如,心理学各个领域的研究人员现在坚持使用随机分配和对照组等方法,以及数据分析程序,如零假设显著性检验,而不考虑它们的相关性。以问题为中心的调查不会规定任何特定工具的常规使用,而是在认为适当时明智地应用工具。下面的文章描述了基于工具的探究和以问题为中心的探究的对比框架的现状,并提供了一些见解,这些见解可能会创造一种更平衡、更富有成效的科学探究方法。DOI: 10.2458 / azu_jmmss_v1i2_mcknight
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Pitfalls of a Tool-based Science and the Promise of a Problem-focused Science
Our present social sciences are at risk of losing sight of their primary purpose: the goal of reducing uncertainty. For years social scientists have drifted slowly toward the routine of employing of accepted methodological, conceptual, and analytical tools rather than engaging in problem oriented inquiry. Scientific contributions are reviewed in accordance to their compliance with the routine application of tools rather than focusing on their ability to problem-solve for a wider population. Researchers in every area of psychology for instance now insist on using methods such as random assignment and control groups, as well as data analytic procedures such as null hypothesis significance testing without regard to their relevance. A problem-focused inquiry would not dictate the routine use of any particular tool but rather the judicious application of tools when deemed appropriate. The following article describes  the current situation in the framework contrasting toolbased and problem-focused inquiry and offers several insights that may create a more balanced and fruitful approach to scientific inquiry. DOI:10.2458/azu_jmmss_v1i2_mcknight
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
26 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信