ABSTRACT

One consequence of novice researchers studying methodology textbooks is confusion: philosophical terminology is complicated and sometimes poorly defined. Another consequence is that inexperienced researchers divide themselves into epistemological cliques, which can inhibit inter-disciplinary discussions. This is a particular problem in subjects, such as Information Science, that bridge disciplines. This article attempts to address these issues by seeking ground common to researchers, regardless of their philosophical standpoint. It identifies several ‘tools of the mind’ which are expanded on and discussed. By becoming familiar with these tools, inexperienced researchers can gain practical insights that create context for philosophical terms they later encounter. ‘Tools of the mind’ discussed are captured in the following questions:

1. What should I research?

2. How do I go about researching it?

3. What assumptions have earlier researchers made?

4. What assumptions can I make without being challenged?

5. How can I indicate what it is that I am studying to researchers who wish to build on my work?

6. What can usefully be compared to the phenomenon I am researching?

7. When circumstances change, what new research opportunities arise?

8. How do I tell my research story so that it will be reliably transmitted?

摘要

新手研究人员学习方法论教科书的一个后果是混乱：哲学术语很复杂，有时定义不明确。另一个后果是缺乏经验的研究人员将自己划分为认识论派系，这可能会抑制跨学科讨论。这是连接学科的学科中的一个特殊问题，例如信息科学。本文试图通过寻找研究人员共同的基础来解决这些问题，无论他们的哲学立场如何。它确定了几个扩展和讨论的“思维工具”。通过熟悉这些工具，没有经验的研究人员可以获得实用的见解，为他们后来遇到的哲学术语创造背景。讨论的“思维工具”包含在以下问题中：

1. 我应该研究什么？

2. 我该如何着手研究它？

3. 早期的研究人员做了哪些假设？

4. 我可以做出哪些假设而不会受到挑战？

5. 我如何向希望以我的工作为基础的研究人员表明我正在研究什么？

6. 什么可以与我正在研究的现象进行比较？

7. 当情况发生变化时，会出现哪些新的研究机会？

8. 我如何讲述我的研究故事，以便可靠地传播？