Context of a Scientific Study

Importance of Method

In this taxonomic model, a psychosocial field like a scientific study (formula: PsH2K) corresponds to an actual endeavour. So it depends on continuing personal functioning. It is not the convenient or hypothetical abstraction that the phrase 'field' so often signifies.

Scientific studies can be conducted by isolated individual scholars, but other scholars are interested and want to use findings in their own work. Research methods-PH'2 are the guarantors of certainty so far as is humanly possible.

How any study will be, is or was conducted is a concern of anyone who is scientifically oriented. So there are two big questions: Given the research question or inquiry goal, was a suitable method used? If the method was suitable, was the method used correctly?
ClosedMore

As just explained, the TET is created by two axes that specify the context of scientific studies—which is the psychosocial field in this case. Remember that this context must recognize the significance of both the group and the person. As a generality:

■ X-axis = the context for the social effect, output, or result in the field.
■ Y-axis = the context for what is personally required to sustain the field.

Social Context

Choice of a research method requires a wider concern than a focus on findings. Whatever the scientific study, the existing collegial consensus will be relevant in valuing the rationale of the study and the method of inquiry being used, as well as influencing acceptance of the findings reported.

The consensus is usually significant because it reflects the output of numerous studies. Whatever the issue, some sort of consensus normally exists. However, there is no guarantee that findings in investigations will contribute to or alter the consensus. Nor is the consensus necessarily correct: it may be (and often is) wildly wrong.

The issue for any research method (and therefore any researcher and any scientific study) is just how much attention should be given to that consensus.

In plotting the research methods, I will therefore consider the degree to which each attends to the current consensus.

X-Axis = Orientation to Consensus

Psychological Context

Scientific studies are risky and uncertain. They consume time and resources. They require energy and motivation. In addition, they often operate under public scrutiny and affect careers. So it is impossible to dissociate choice of a research method from personal matters like interests, beliefs, assumptions and preferences.

Taken together these are the basis for researcher convictions. The focus here is on how and whether such personal convictions are intrinsic to use of a research method, and so contribute indirectly or even directly to inquiry.

Note: This axis is about differentiating degrees of genuine commitment rather than issues of deliberate bias or fraudulent intent.

In plotting the research methods, I will therefore consider the degree to which each activates and engages specific convictions beyond an overall belief in scientific inquiry.

Y Axis = Researcher Conviction

These two formulations for the X and Y axes generate the initial TET image as shown.

An Interesting Correspondence:Closed Conviction and consensus are the two poles in the approach duality (the diagonal sets) for the ways of using language (PH'5). This similarity requires further investigation but possibly relates to similarity and differences in regard to the assertion of what is reality and/or truth.

Originally drafted: 31-Mar-2015. Last amended 21-Apr-2022.