Ancestors

Toot

Written by Fuzzy Leapfrog on 2025-01-20 at 14:05

I know it's constantly stated that science is objective. I constantly emphasise that researchers are human beings and that their backgrounds, experiences and lives influence not only what they research, but also how they do it. That's why diversity in science is important. Yes, science is based on good scientific practice, transparency and reproducibility, but the what and how have degrees of freedom and are shaped by those who do the research.

https://www.tumblr.com/fuzzyleapfrog/773198288681877504/what-and-how-we-research

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from fuzzyleapfrog@chaos.social

Descendants

Written by Fuzzy Leapfrog on 2025-01-20 at 14:20

I don't know if I would do research on queer perspectives in library and information science if I wasn't queer myself. I don't know if I would choose a transformative research design if I didn't see inequalities and a need for change. Who we are shapes what we do and how we do it, whether it's in research or anywhere else.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from fuzzyleapfrog@chaos.social

Written by lobingera on 2025-01-20 at 14:22

@fuzzyleapfrog See me confused.

Scientific methods try very hard to rule out observer effects i.e. results should not/never depend on the scientists "backgrounds, experiences and lives influence" - or did i miss the memo?

While i agree that choosing a topic is influenced by the above and therefore diversity is strictly needed.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from lobingera@chaos.social

Written by Fuzzy Leapfrog on 2025-01-20 at 14:28

@lobingera Research tries very hard, but what a researcher studies and which methods they choose, while not completely random and for sure linked to their hypothesis, still has degrees of freedom. It's a fallacy to think that it's even possible to eliminate that, and it would take the humanity out of research, so I don't know if we should even try. Especially when it comes to qualitative research, reflection is a big part of the process and less denies the influence that researchers have.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from fuzzyleapfrog@chaos.social

Written by Fuzzy Leapfrog on 2025-01-20 at 14:29

@lobingera To give one very impressive example: think about singing birds.

https://www.nature.com/nature-index/news/women-scientists-have-disrupted-research-on-bird-song-diversity-in-stem

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from fuzzyleapfrog@chaos.social

Written by lobingera on 2025-01-20 at 14:37

@fuzzyleapfrog But that's not a counterexample (of the "how"). This is topic selection ...

actually it's even something else.

If women had studied bird songs of a population where only male bird sing, they would not have found a female bird sing.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from lobingera@chaos.social

Written by Fuzzy Leapfrog on 2025-01-20 at 15:10

@lobingera Agree to disagree. I'm not up for a debate on a social media platform though, especially not at the moment. The illusion of complete objectivity and the constant pursuit of it, not the pursuit of getting closer to it, has just always been so interesting to me to observe and think about, hence the post.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from fuzzyleapfrog@chaos.social