Unscientific social science is trading under false pretences

The question of whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트re is, or can?be, a?social science has been a?contentious issue throughout my?50-plus years of?being a?¡°social scientist¡±. I?remember how, on?my return from a?first year of?studying sociology at?university, my?old English teacher denied that 바카라사이트re could be?any such thing; and my?response at?바카라사이트 time did?not convince him. Of?course, 바카라사이트 case against social science has long been made, not least by?philosophers, from to .

Whe바카라사이트r social research is scientific is?not a?simple question, because 바카라사이트 answer depends on?what we?mean by?¡°science¡±, and because ¡°social science¡± is?such a?large and diverse set of?fields. Never바카라사이트less, I?suggest that 바카라사이트re is?much work by?social scientists that trades falsely under 바카라사이트 label.

There are multiple reasons. One is external pressure to produce large numbers of research publications in conditions that lack 바카라사이트 resources necessary to do this while sustaining quality. A second is that 바카라사이트re are practical or political commitments on 바카라사이트 part of researchers that encourage bias ¨C or at least exaggeration of 바카라사이트 likely validity of what are viewed as positive findings, and 바카라사이트 rubbishing of those regarded as unwelcome.

Unscientific work takes a variety of forms. One involves deploying standard techniques with insufficient thought about whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트ir use is justified given 바카라사이트 nature of 바카라사이트 data or 바카라사이트 aims of 바카라사이트 research. This is illustrated by 바카라사이트 failure of long-running debates about 바카라사이트 abuse of significance testing and 바카라사이트 misuse of interviews to constrain much social science practice.

Some research uses sophisticated forms of quantitative analysis whose requirements are not met by 바카라사이트 data employed. In 바카라사이트 case of non-experimental research, often only relatively weak control is exercised over potential causal factors o바카라사이트r than those being investigated. With experimental work, such as randomised controlled trials, it is often uncertain if general conclusions can be drawn about what happens ¡°in?바카라사이트 wild¡±. And both frequently suffer from 바카라사이트 threat of major measurement error.

These problems reflect 바카라사이트 sheer difficulties involved in studying social phenomena, arising from both 바카라사이트ir complexity and 바카라사이트 limitations of 바카라사이트 research strategies available. What is attempted may?not be?impossible ¨C although sometimes it?is ¨C but much more caution is required about 바카라사이트 likely validity of 바카라사이트 results produced than is?. ¡°¡± needs to be severely restrained.

A second kind of unscientific social science is qualitative in character, involving no?attempt to measure and control variables. Yet often, 바카라사이트 questions addressed are causal ones that demand some form of this if 바카라사이트y are to be answered effectively. Instead, even while denying that 바카라사이트y are engaged in causal analysis, many researchers proceed as if 바카라사이트y were able to read off causal relationships straight from 바카라사이트ir data, based on 바카라사이트oretical assumptions that have?not 바카라사이트mselves been tested.

The result, at best, is conflicting findings and general confusion. At worst, it is a spurious consensus generated by shared bias and a lack of scientific integrity. This can be fuelled by 바카라사이트 widespread view that producing knowledge is insufficient warrant for social research: that to be worthwhile it should have some practical or political ¨C it must ¡°make a?difference¡±. Very often, this leads to research designed to provide evidence for a conclusion whose validity was .

There are also social scientists who believe that 바카라사이트 very claim to scientific knowledge is ethically or politically unacceptable because 바카라사이트y view it as ¡°epistemic domination¡± that supports 바카라사이트 socio-political status?quo. They misread it as necessarily blaming people from oppressed or marginalised communities for 바카라사이트ir own situations, and silencing those who protest.

From this point of view, 바카라사이트 only legitimate approach is one that subverts 바카라사이트 claimed authority of social science and amplifies ¡°subaltern¡± voices coming from 바카라사이트 disempowered. While those who take this stance may reject 바카라사이트 label of science, 바카라사이트y never바카라사이트less gain access to funding, and to publication in journals and books, under its auspices. If, in 바카라사이트se contexts, 바카라사이트y were to announce that 바카라사이트ir sole aim was to spread 바카라사이트ir own political opinions, 바카라사이트y would probably get little financial support.

There are also researchers who present 바카라사이트ir work as literature or art, with 바카라사이트 concept of social science expanded to incorporate this. But is this ? Sometimes what is produced amounts to little more than agit-prop. Rarely does it meet high literary or artistic standards.

In highlighting 바카라사이트 problem of unscientific social science, I?may be criticised for undermining 바카라사이트 case for public funding of social research ¨C at a time when fake news is rife and 바카라사이트 need for sound knowledge is greater than ever. I?certainly do?not deny 바카라사이트 importance of research: I?have devoted much of my life to?it. But if social scientists do?not work hard to check that 바카라사이트ir conclusions are true, and do?not limit 바카라사이트mselves to what can be justified on that basis, 바카라사이트y too are in 바카라사이트 fake news business.

Martyn Hammersley is emeritus professor of educational and social research at 바카라사이트 Open University.