Becoming More Accountable: A Comment on Hammersley and Gomm

dc.contributor.author	Romm, Norma R.A.
dc.date.accessioned	2013-12-17T07:32:02Z
dc.date.available	2013-12-17T07:32:02Z
dc.date.issued	1997
dc.identifier.citation	Romm, N.R.A. (1997). Becoming More Accountable: A Comment on Hammersley and Gomm. Sociological Research Online, vol. 2, no. 3, <http://www.socresonline.org.uk/2/3/2.html>	en
dc.identifier.issn	1360-7804
dc.identifier.other	http://www.socresonline.org.uk/2/3/2.html
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10500/13053
dc.description.abstract	This article provides a response to Hammersley and Gomm's article entitled Bias in Social Research (1997). Hammersley and Gomm's proposed conception of bias is rooted in a particular view of the pursuit of scientific knowledge - a view which they call nonfoundationalist. The way in which Hammersley and Gomm account for their nonfoundationalist view and the way in which they level critiques against relativism and standpoint epistemology, are challenged in this article. The discussion is focused around my concern that their account excludes (as outside the range of relevant argument in research communities) a serious consideration of alternative epistemological orientations.	en
dc.language.iso	en	en
dc.publisher	Sage	en
dc.subject	Accountability; Bias; Reciprocity; Research Process; Responsibility	en
dc.title	Becoming More Accountable: A Comment on Hammersley and Gomm	en
dc.type	Article	en
dc.description.department	ABET and Youth Development	en