In readings I've been directed to for how to write quality papers, there are certain features (such as making your epistemological and ontological position clear, outlining your methodology and method of analysis etc) that are stated as 'required'.
However, as I read through journal papers - even very recent ones - often these features are missing.
I'm wondering why it doesn't seem important to journal editors, given that the importance of these features is explained in detail - it's not just about passing an assignment.
Can anyone help me understand?
Mohammed Naoua
- That's the message I'm getting from reading about writing up research but it's just not the norm. I think there must be some reason whether it's collegial understanding of the time pressures, a disagreement that these are indeed needed, or something else. Just trying to get to the bottom of it.
Mohammed Naoua
- the submission guidelines are where I started. While they talk generally about 'methodology', they don't explicitly talk about all aspects within that (such as philosophical positioning).I did, however, reach out to an editor and got the response that the particular (published) article I was exploring would not have been accepted for his journal. There is clearly no consistency across journals, and it ultimately comes down to the editorial board. I'm still interested to know what makes one person say 'yes' and another say 'no' though.
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Methodology