Summary : ' Aspectos Formales Para Escribir Articulos

Fahnestock investigates how original science writing is primarily devoted to presenting facts and assumes the audience has relevant background knowledge and understands the significance. Conversely, accommodated writings shift the genre to become epideictic and thus neglect addressing facts, instead focus on emphasizing the importance of a discovery. One reason Fahnestock provides for the shift in genre is in order for an audience to realize the significance of a discovery accommodators must ensure the audience is able to accept a fact and align it according with existing beliefs. To ensure they are successful, Fahnestock argues that accommodators rely on

Moreover, they used race, sex, and gender to impact the sociopolitical sphere, and create a certain level of autonomy and monopolization over scientific knowledge (Gieryn, 1983: 783). This directly relates to our discussion on credibility, and the popular image of the scientist as one of constructing facts (Haraway 1991: 23). Creating and maintaining an image of someone who is objective, one uninfluenced by social aspects (ibid: 23). Thus, making scientists absolved from any social accountability, and free from any restraints outside of the scientific community (ibid

When looking at each of the articles presented, there are defining factors that allow researchers to determine whether or not it is a scholarly or popular resource. Of the two articles, one can assert that the USA Today Article is a popular source and the article by Baker and Algorta (2016) is a scholarly source. Each of these sources has their advantages and disadvantages due to the stylistic devices employed by the writers. With the help of each article, knowledge of readers and viewers is expanded, and while there are some facets that detract from the quality of the knowledge gained, the readers benefits from the time spent reading.

By today’s standards, Zimbardo’s experiment would be seen as unethical and he would not have been given the authority to conduct such a cruel experiment. Therefore, gathering information to support his hypothesis would have to be collected by different measures. The most used method of collecting data about the power of social situations is better collected through alternative means like surveys and interviews because people are free to respond. Both the survey and interview research methods are done by targeting a section of the population and asking a series of questions either in an interview or via questionnaire (Doing Sociological Research, n.d., p.41). Another method for generating research data is through participant observation (Doing

production of knowledge, scientific basis, “tree of research” transplanted from North to South, “The new objectivity ensured accuracy and fairness of representation.” (37)

Randolph (2009) noted in his scholarly article that the three common formats in writing the researcher’s review includes the Historical Format, wherein, the studies are written in chronological order; the Conceptual Format, wherein the writer considers the concept present in the related studies and the Methodological Format which focuses on how the related studies are made. However, it is noteworthy that a combination of the abovementioned formats are also effective in writing the review and that the way that the format of the review for a thesis depends upon the type of information that the researcher have

The purpose of this assignment is to analyze the two articles that were given to us, in terms of whether or not they are using a scientific method and which of the two paradigms -constructivism/positivism- they are following. The first part of my assignment contains information about what is considered a “scientific method”. Afterwards follows an analysis on whether the two articles (“Criminal Behaviour in users of Psychoactive Substances Who Began Treatment”, “I just have to move on: Women’s coping experiences and reflections following their first year after primary breast cancer surgery”) are scientifically approved. Thence follows an interpretation on what is “constructivism”, “positivism” and in the end, an explanation concerning the two articles and which paradigm each of them follows.

While one’s own perspective may help the knower to understand the principle of human sciences, the human sciences are generally objective as they are a science. The knower’s perspective is not as important in the complexities and advanced end of the department, and in many cases can misconstrue or invalidate the findings by wrongly altering the process. To understand why perspective is considered damaging in the field of human sciences, one can research the history of the perception of

   * A meta estabelecem dominar NUMA Transição É uma Força de Construir Uma cinética Mediante uma Criação de ciclos virtuosos Que uma credibilidade, evitando CAIR nsa ciclos

The writer has used statistics to draw the reader’s intention more on the issue strange his argument in the phrase “university researchers report

Un artículo científico es un informe escrito que comparte, inicialmente, los resultados de una investigación (Calderón, 2009). Actualmente, es de gran acogida en la comunidad científica puesto que se caracteriza por ser breve, conciso y preciso. Pero, para los investigadores en general, aún existen algunas dudas de cuáles son los parámetros de publicación y, de igual manera, cómo redactar y ordenar un texto de esta índole.

En los siguientes capítulos hablaremos sobre la comunicación y la comunicación corporativa, la comunicación ha sido uno de los factores claves para la subsistencia y evolución del ser humano, ya que sin ella no se podrían haber transmitido datos e informaciones de los progresos y descubrimientos del hombre por otro lado la Comunicación Corporativa es la que gestiona la comunicación en las organizaciones.

Reflexivity is the continual evaluation of relation between ‘knowledge’ and ‘the method of producing knowledge’ (Calás and Smircich, 1992). Its importance has been widely discussed due to the lack of awareness of researchers’ role in knowledge production.

Longino begins by considering problematic definitions of objectivity in science, such as those given by the Positivists and many empiricists. She argues that objectivity in science is safe, due to the nature of the social structure of science. Scientist’s values are justified and accounted for in her contextualist account of objectivity, and it is this multitude of values within a community that result in objectivity.

This chapter focuses on the study’s main methodology, the teaching experiment, and how work proceeded. It also presents the data collection methods that are used to gather the research data. The literature would be consulted as well to give some details about the research methodology as well as the research methods.