forked from saylordotorg/text_principles-of-sociological-inquiry-qualitative-and-quantitative-methods
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
/
Copy paths06-04-the-practice-of-science-versus.html
94 lines (78 loc) · 13.4 KB
/
s06-04-the-practice-of-science-versus.html
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta charset="UTF-8">
<link href="shared/bookhub.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css">
<title>The Practice of Science Versus the Uses of Science</title>
</head>
<body>
<div id=navbar-top class="navbar">
<div class="navbar-part left">
<a href="s06-03-ethics-at-micro-meso-and-macro.html"><img src="shared/images/batch-left.png"></a> <a href="s06-03-ethics-at-micro-meso-and-macro.html">Previous Section</a>
</div>
<div class="navbar-part middle">
<a href="index.html"><img src="shared/images/batch-up.png"></a> <a href="index.html">Table of Contents</a>
</div>
<div class="navbar-part right">
<a href="s07-01-starting-where-you-already-are.html">Next Section</a> <a href="s07-01-starting-where-you-already-are.html"><img src="shared/images/batch-right.png"></a>
</div>
</div>
<div id="book-content">
<div class="section" id="blackstone_1.0-ch03_s04" condition="start-of-chunk" version="5.0" lang="en">
<h2 class="title editable block">
<span class="title-prefix">3.4</span> The Practice of Science Versus the Uses of Science</h2>
<div class="learning_objectives editable block" id="blackstone_1.0-ch03_s04_n01">
<h3 class="title">Learning Objectives</h3>
<ol class="orderedlist" id="blackstone_1.0-ch03_s04_l01">
<li>Define replication, and be able to describe why it matters in terms of research ethics.</li>
<li>Describe what it means to use science in an ethical way.</li>
</ol>
</div>
<p class="para editable block" id="blackstone_1.0-ch03_s04_p01">Research ethics has to do with both how research is conducted and how findings from that research are used and by whom. In this section, we’ll consider research ethics from both angles.</p>
<div class="section" id="blackstone_1.0-ch03_s04_s01">
<h2 class="title editable block">Doing Science the Ethical Way</h2>
<p class="para editable block" id="blackstone_1.0-ch03_s04_s01_p01">As you should now be aware, researchers must consider their own personal ethical principles in addition to following those of their institution, their discipline, and their community. We’ve already considered many of the ways that sociologists work to ensure the ethical practice of research, such as informing and protecting subjects. But the practice of ethical research doesn’t end once subjects have been identified and data have been collected. Sociologists must also fully disclose their research procedures and findings. This means being honest about how research subjects were identified and recruited, how exactly data were collected and analyzed, and ultimately, what findings were reached.</p>
<p class="para editable block" id="blackstone_1.0-ch03_s04_s01_p02">If researchers fully disclose how they conducted their research, then those of us who use their work to build our own research projects, to create social policies, or to make decisions about our lives can have some level of confidence in the work. By sharing how research was conducted, a researcher helps assure readers that he or she has conducted legitimate research and didn’t simply come to whatever conclusions he or she <em class="emphasis">wanted</em> to find. A description or presentation of research findings that is not accompanied by information about research methodology is missing some relevant information. Sometimes methodological details are left out because there isn’t time or space to share them. This is often the case with news reports of research findings. Other times, there may be a more insidious reason that that important information isn’t there. This may be the case if sharing methodological details would call the legitimacy of a study into question. As researchers, it is our ethical responsibility to fully disclose our research procedures. As consumers of research, it is our ethical responsibility to pay attention to such details. We’ll discuss this more in the section “Using Science the Ethical Way.”</p>
<p class="para editable block" id="blackstone_1.0-ch03_s04_s01_p03">There’s a <em class="emphasis">New Yorker</em> cartoon that depicts a set of filing cabinets that aptly demonstrates what we don’t want to see happen with research. Each filing cabinet drawer in the cartoon is labeled differently. The labels include such headings as, “Our Facts,” “Their Facts,” “Neutral Facts,” “Disputable Facts,” “Absolute Facts,” “Bare Facts,” “Unsubstantiated Facts,” and “Indisputable Facts” (<a class="link" target="_blank" href="http://www.cartoonbank.com/1977/filing-cabinets-labeled-our-facts-their-facts-neutral-facts-disputable-facts-etc/invt/116530">http://www .cartoonbank.com/1977/filing-cabinets-labeled-our-facts-their-facts-neutral-facts-disputable-facts-etc/invt/116530</a>). The implication of this cartoon is that one might just choose to open the file drawer of her choice and pick whichever facts she likes best. While this may occur if we use some of the alternative sources of knowledge described in <a class="xref" href="blackstone_1.0-ch01#blackstone_1.0-ch01">Chapter 1 "Introduction"</a>, it is fortunately <em class="emphasis">not</em> how the discovery of facts works in sociology, or in any other science for that matter. There actually <em class="emphasis">is</em> a method to this madness we call research.</p>
<p class="para editable block" id="blackstone_1.0-ch03_s04_s01_p04">The requirement of honesty comes not only from the American Sociological Association’s principles of integrity and scientific responsibility but also out of the scientific principle of <span class="margin_term"><a class="glossterm">replication</a><span class="glossdef">The principle that enough information should be provided about a researcher’s methodological procedures that another researcher, at another time or place, could reproduce the study in question.</span></span>. Ideally, this means that one scientist could repeat another’s study with relative ease. By replicating a study, we may become more (or less) confident in the original study’s findings. Replication is far more difficult (perhaps impossible) to achieve in the case of ethnographic studies that last months or years, but it nevertheless sets an important standard for all social scientific researchers: that we provide as much detail as possible about the processes by which we reach our conclusions.</p>
<p class="para editable block" id="blackstone_1.0-ch03_s04_s01_p05">Full disclosure also includes the need to be honest about a study’s strengths and weaknesses, both with oneself and with others. Being aware of the strengths and weaknesses of one’s own work can help a researcher make reasonable recommendations about the next steps other researchers might consider taking in their inquiries. Awareness and disclosure of a study’s strengths and weaknesses can also help highlight the theoretical or policy implications of one’s work. In addition, openness about strengths and weaknesses helps those reading the research better evaluate the work and decide for themselves how or whether to rely on its findings. Finally, openness about a study’s sponsors is crucial. How can we effectively evaluate research without knowing who paid the bills?</p>
<p class="para editable block" id="blackstone_1.0-ch03_s04_s01_p06">The standard of replicability along with openness about a study’s strengths, weaknesses, and funders enable those who read the research to evaluate it fairly and completely. Knowledge of funding sources is often raised as an issue in medical research. Understandably, independent studies of new drugs may be more compelling to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) than studies touting the virtues of a new drug that happen to have been funded by the company who created that drug. But medical researchers aren’t the only ones who need to be honest about their funding. If we know, for example, that a political think tank with ties to a particular party has funded some sociological research, we can take that knowledge into consideration when reviewing the study’s findings and stated policy implications. Lastly, and related to this point, we must consider how, by whom, and for what purpose research may be used.</p>
</div>
<div class="section" id="blackstone_1.0-ch03_s04_s02">
<h2 class="title editable block">Using Science the Ethical Way</h2>
<p class="para editable block" id="blackstone_1.0-ch03_s04_s02_p01">Science has many uses. By “use” I mean the ways that science is understood and applied (as opposed to the way it is conducted). Some use science to create laws and social policies; others use it to understand themselves and those around them. Some people rely on science to improve their life conditions or those of other people, while still others use it to improve their businesses or other undertakings. In each case, the most ethical way for us to use science is to educate ourselves about the design and purpose of any studies we may wish to use or apply, to recognize our limitations in terms of scientific and methodological knowledge and how those limitations may impact our understanding of research, and to apply the findings of scientific investigation only in cases or to populations for which they are actually relevant.</p>
<p class="para editable block" id="blackstone_1.0-ch03_s04_s02_p02">Social scientists who conduct research on behalf of organizations and agencies may face additional ethical questions about the use of their research, particularly when the organization for which an applied study is conducted controls the final report and the publicity it receives. As mentioned in <a class="xref" href="blackstone_1.0-ch01#blackstone_1.0-ch01">Chapter 1 "Introduction"</a>, after graduating from college with a sociology degree, I worked for an evaluation research firm. The firm I worked for is in fact just one division of a larger, nonprofit social services organization. The research division of this organization conducts in-house evaluations of the effectiveness of its own programs (and also provides evaluation research consulting to other, outside agencies). While I never saw any questionable practices with respect to the uses of science while there, the <em class="emphasis">potential</em> conflict of interest between in-house evaluation researchers and the employer being evaluated certainly exists. A similar conflict of interest might exist between independent researchers whose work is being funded by some government agency or private foundation.</p>
<p class="para editable block" id="blackstone_1.0-ch03_s04_s02_p03">So who decides what constitutes ethical conduct or use of research? Perhaps we all do. What qualifies as ethical research may shift over time and across cultures as individual researchers; disciplinary organizations; members of society; and regulatory entities such as institutional review boards, courts, and lawmakers all work to define the boundaries between ethical and unethical research.</p>
<div class="key_takeaways editable block" id="blackstone_1.0-ch03_s04_s02_n01">
<h3 class="title">Key Takeaways</h3>
<ul class="itemizedlist" id="blackstone_1.0-ch03_s04_s02_l01">
<li>Conducting research ethically requires that researchers be ethical not only in their data collection procedures but also in reporting their methods and findings.</li>
<li>The ethical use of research requires an effort to understand research, an awareness of one’s own limitations in terms of knowledge and understanding, and the honest application of research findings.</li>
<li>What qualifies as ethical research is determined collectively by a number of individuals, organizations, and institutions and may change over time.</li>
</ul>
</div>
<div class="exercises editable block" id="blackstone_1.0-ch03_s04_s02_n02">
<h3 class="title">Exercises</h3>
<ol class="orderedlist" id="blackstone_1.0-ch03_s04_s02_l02">
<li>Think of an instance when doing science ethically might conflict with using science ethically. Describe your example and how you, as a researcher, might proceed were you to find yourself in such a quandary.</li>
<li>Using library and Internet resources, find three examples of funded sociological research. Who were the funders in each case? How do the researchers inform readers about their funders? In what ways, if any, do you think each funder might influence the research? What questions, if any, do you have about the research after taking these potential influences into consideration?</li>
</ol>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div id=navbar-bottom class="navbar">
<div class="navbar-part left">
<a href="s06-03-ethics-at-micro-meso-and-macro.html"><img src="shared/images/batch-left.png"></a> <a href="s06-03-ethics-at-micro-meso-and-macro.html">Previous Section</a>
</div>
<div class="navbar-part middle">
<a href="index.html"><img src="shared/images/batch-up.png"></a> <a href="index.html">Table of Contents</a>
</div>
<div class="navbar-part right">
<a href="s07-01-starting-where-you-already-are.html">Next Section</a> <a href="s07-01-starting-where-you-already-are.html"><img src="shared/images/batch-right.png"></a>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<script type="text/javascript" src="shared/book.js"></script>
</body>
</html>