Becoming More Accountable: A Comment on Hammersley and                     Gomm | Zendy

Romm N. | Zendy

AI Assistant Blog Pricing

Home ZAIA Blog

Open Access

Becoming More Accountable: A Comment on Hammersley and Gomm

Author(s) -

Romm N.

Publication year - 1997

Publication title -

sociological research online

Language(s) - English

Resource type - Journals

SCImago Journal Rank - 0.593

H-Index - 49

ISSN - 1360-7804

DOI - 10.5153/sro.115

Subject(s) - epistemology , relativism , sociology , argument (complex analysis) , range (aeronautics) , social science , philosophy , chemistry , biochemistry , materials science , composite material

This article provides a response to Hammersley and Gomm's article entitledBias in Social Research (1997). Hammersley and Gomm'sproposed conception of bias is rooted in a particular view of the pursuit ofscientific knowledge - a view which they call nonfoundationalist. The way inwhich Hammersley and Gomm account for their nonfoundationalist view and the wayin which they level critiques against relativism and standpoint epistemology,are challenged in this article. The discussion is focused around my concern thattheir account excludes (as outside the range of relevant argument in researchcommunities) a serious consideration of alternative epistemologicalorientations.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.

Having issues? You can contact us here

Accelerating Research