Um, exactly how does it work this using references for status and
credibility?
So, if a person writes a paper that has faulty and fallacious reasoning, and
reports flawed findings, it's a good paper provided the person includes lots
of references to show they are a member of a community with a long history,
or are saying thanks to someone, or the references are cited only to improve
credibility or are well known etc. On that basis it should be accepted by
any relevant journal.
Or, if a person writes a correctly reasoned paper that correctly reports
important and useful findings, it's a bad paper if they didn't include
lots of references to show they are a member of a community with a long
history, or are saying thanks to someone, or the references are cited only
to improve credibility or are well known etc. On that basis it should be
rejected by any relevant journal?
Or perhaps there is some formally-defined middle ground with a sort of score
chart? Something like (say) 3 apparently relevant citations to researcher
in a well-established research community gets one off the hook for one
bit of incorrect reasoning, one fallacious conclusion, or perhaps a couple
of false findings?
How does it go with the stuff at the other end? I mean, for a researcher
reporting a research finding that when people use it results in deaths or
people lose lots of money. Perhaps it can be fully offset by a half a dozen
random citations of publications to researchers with the higher levels of
status like Ken or Don?
Or perhaps, 'Don't worry about the faulty reactor design. If it has a
meltdown everything will be fine - the researchers had a couple references
to Einstein, he's got a big enough name hasn't he?'
One perspective on references is personal isn't the same as important.
What happens to a field if accurate reasoning and avoidance of fallacies
reasoning is replaced by using references as personal influence?
Um, how does that work?
Terry
Ranulph Glanville:<Snip>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..."
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|