On Nov 27, 2012, at 09:38 , Ranulph Glanville wrote:
> Don't let's forget that references are also a way of saying
>
> "I join and intend to remain a member of a community with a long
> history"
>
> "Thank you to..."
>
> Ranulph
Dear Ranulph,
I agree, but I'd humbly like to suggest that we better
understand these as intended implications of who and what we
cite.
I think reference lists can say quite a lot about a research
communication, ie a publication. As I read a paper--that I am
to review--I often mark the references at the end as cited in
favour of, cited in contrast to, or cited as a neutral source.
After reading I look to see how many references are unmarked
as one of these three kinds. If there are lots of these, it
suggests weaknesses in how the communication is built upon
existing published work. I also check that the cited in
favour and cited in contrast form (what I understand to be)
coherent sets, ie, that the in favour citations can fit
happily together, and the same for the in contrast to
citations, and that there are not obviously contradictory in
favour and in contrast citations. This helps to identify that
the author(s) do place them selves well in a camp, and that
the camp can indeed be identified. If there are few or no in
contrast to citations, it suggests that the critical state of
the art is not well presented. Similarly, if there are few or
no in favour citations, it suggests that what is presented is
not properly connected to existing relevant work. Research
contributions are made in a friendly camp, not in the
opposition's camp, and not in "no-man's land" in between. And
most research contributions should be usefully incremental,
even if funding agencies these days don't seem to think this
kind of research is worth funding.
I don't want to say that this is a completely robust and
reliable form of analysis. It isn't! Sometimes it cannot be
sensibly applied. And sometimes it doesn't work.
Nonetheless, I do find it useful in understanding how a
research communication has been built and how it works, or
doesn't.
I've used this for many years now. I learned it when I was
doing my PhD, from a senior research manager at a (UK)
government funded industrial research lab. He told me he used
it to help him tell the difference between (what he called)
academic hand waving, that wasn't worth trying to understand,
and substantial research results that it'd be worth trying to
understand.
Best regards,
Tim
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|