Mistakes can be incorrect entering of data or misreading of results. These things are sometimes inevitable since we are all human. The identifying of falsification is in my opinion is the most important, as these can have more serious implications in the future. Replication of your own research can lead to noticing trends and patterns in your results. This is an affirmation for your work, it makes it stronger and by replication your claims can be better supported.
“The measure of intelligence is the ability to change” (Albert Einstein). By being receptive to change, one 's mindset can open up a new level of intelligence. Many articles such as “7 Benefits of Being Open-Minded” by Dani Dipirro and “The Importance of Being Open-Minded” by Sydney Dreason shows that being willing to change can help someone overcome various problems. The best way to respond to conflict is by being open-minded. By being amenable, people’s eyes may be open to new ideas, provides active listening, and builds communication skills.
As shown in the Republic Book II, ideas like justice and reason are powerful. The pursuit of knowledge and the act of attempting to understand ideas such as justice can help humans get closer to the truth even if we will never fully understand the idea of justice itself. Another advantage of ideology is it does not share the same trap of instant gratification as
More frequent in qualitative research is to generalize to theory rather than to population, it is looking for a system that their findings are included in it. In other words, the quality of the theoretical inferences that derive from the data, is the important issue when generalizing (Bryman, 2009) Janesick (2000) suggests alternative ways to think about the trinity of validity, reliabil-ity and generalization, in fact he offers to change the language to a more accurately describes the complexity and texture of qualitative research. He also argues that “the traditional view of generalizability limits the ability to reconceptualize the role of social science in education and human services” (p.
As a result of situational differences in every research, social and cultural contexts would vary. On top of that, the provision of some contextual description of the research would lower the risks of the readers misinterpreting the study and consequently, the results. Thus, contextualization is the key to revealing the various context in which a particular research lies in. This is important in the development of the psychology of leadership research and theory building because the setting of the research could be different, and hence possibly resulting in different sets of results altogether. For instance, the trait perspective in leadership research could either be done in a lab setting or in a workplace setting, both of which would have observed different implications on the results.
As we can see, “comfort”, “opportunity” and “better world” load together in one component and indicate positive attitudes towards science and technology. On the contrary, the second dimension includes the loadings of “too fast”, “harm faith”, and “harm mankind”, and indicate skeptical attitudes towards science and technology. Moreover, whereas the first dimension hints at thinking about the next generation, the well-being of broader world, the second dimension focuses on personal life and values. Thus, we may call these two dimensions simply as “positive general” and “skeptical personal”. Such structure is substantively and technically satisfying, as the loadings are quite high, and difference between two dimensions is interpretable.
Flyvbjerg (2006) for instance argue that it is misleading to conclude that one cannot generalise from a single case, but that it depends on the type of case one is considering and how it is chosen. He postulated that the strategic choice of a case can contribute to its generalisability. Yin (2009) on the contrary argue that case studies are generalizable to theoretical propositions (analytic generalisations) and not to populations or universes (statistical genearalisation) and that “in analytical generalisation, the investigator is striving to generalise a particular set of results to some broader theory” p.43). A third group of the proponents of the
“All progress is born of inquiry. Doubt is often better than overconfidence, for it leads to inquiry, and inquiry leads to innovation or invention” -Hudson Maxim This section aims to explore the methodological tools and techniques that are implemented in the research project for fulfilling the aims and objectives. The section explores various subs –sections such as philosophical posture of the study, approach to the research, research strategy and methods to deduce the arguments with substantiated evidence. There has been paramount importance given to this chapter. The importance of research design and methodology has been also been noted by (Kothari, 2006).
But if the case is just a little bit more complex, and the pros and cons of rules and procedures are slightly more nuanced, it is more helpful to look at the broader picture and consider the situation in light of the values in which the bureaucratic organisation is rooted. Cutting rules left and right may actually do more harm than good and does not address the real issue. Innovation is a delicate art that deserves careful attention, strong support and perseverance. Fortunately, public organisations and their leaders are increasingly motivated and dedicated to making the practice of innovation a permanent component of their leadership strategies. Based on what is known about rules and procedures on the one hand, and drivers of innovation on the other, it seems that a positive opportunity-oriented approach, focused on building capacity to solve social problems, is more promising than a negative obstacle-oriented approach, focused on rules and
In history, the evidences must be rational in giving out the facts based on common sense and logical thinking. Creating false assumptions or misinterpretations of certain facts might disrupt, change or interrupt the autonomy in history. Moreover, the evidences taken should be scientific. It means that the facts written are needed to be logic and supported by empirical evidences. In addition, the facts are needed to be collected based on experiences, scientific experiments and not only by ideas.