Writing in active voice would make it easier for the reader to inject much needed "why?" and "Did you consider?" Questions. Casual readers would also begin to see the risk of the risky "follow the science" admonition.
I like the idea a lot and it would take a good deal of critical thinking skills and compassion to interact with science in this way. I see potential benefits for thoughtful souls and pitfalls when trying to communicate with the public .
Love this question. With so much bias being unconscious, how could you even begin to root it out without actively looking for it and acknowledging it's role?
Here’s a non-scientist’s take: as long as the writing still starts from an encounter with the natural world, I’m all for acknowledging and voicing the ways that subjectivity/bias comes into play. What I wouldn’t want to see is the writing starting from bias, and allowing bias to drive the formation of conclusions. Acknowledge bias, but don’t lead with it.
Academic writing is so godawful most of the time, and I believe that definitely has something to do with the passive voice which most researchers use. No. Unbearable! I cannot read more poorly written articles (I will keep doing it, of course).
Writing in active voice would make it easier for the reader to inject much needed "why?" and "Did you consider?" Questions. Casual readers would also begin to see the risk of the risky "follow the science" admonition.
I like the idea a lot and it would take a good deal of critical thinking skills and compassion to interact with science in this way. I see potential benefits for thoughtful souls and pitfalls when trying to communicate with the public .
Love this question. With so much bias being unconscious, how could you even begin to root it out without actively looking for it and acknowledging it's role?
Here’s a non-scientist’s take: as long as the writing still starts from an encounter with the natural world, I’m all for acknowledging and voicing the ways that subjectivity/bias comes into play. What I wouldn’t want to see is the writing starting from bias, and allowing bias to drive the formation of conclusions. Acknowledge bias, but don’t lead with it.
Academic writing is so godawful most of the time, and I believe that definitely has something to do with the passive voice which most researchers use. No. Unbearable! I cannot read more poorly written articles (I will keep doing it, of course).
I'm glad to hear that you are getting over your cold. :).