Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
experience of writing extended documents, and may be confronting the difficulties
of writing in English when it is not their first language. It is not surprising that
some researchers struggle. Many are intimidated by writing, and avoid it because
describing research is less entertaining than actually doing it. For some advisors, the
task of helping a student to write well is not one that comes naturally, and can be a
distraction from the day-to-day academic work of research and teaching.
Yet writing defines what we consider to be knowledge. Scientific results are only
accepted as correct once they are refereed and published; if they aren't published,
they aren't confirmed.
1
Each new contribution builds on a foundation of existing
concepts that are known and, within limits, trusted. New research may be wrong or
misguided, but the process of reviewing eliminates some work of poor quality, while
the scientific culture of questioning ideas and requiring convincing demonstrations of
their correctness means that, over time, weak or unsupported concepts are forgotten.
A unifying principle for the scientific culture that determines the value of research
is that of
skepticism
. Within science, skepticism is an open-minded approach to
knowledge: a researcher should accept claims provisionally given reasonable evi-
dence and given agreement (or at least absence of contradiction) with other provi-
sionally accepted claims. A skeptic seeks the most accurate description or solution
that fits the known facts, without concern for issues such as the need to seek favour
with authorities, while suspending judgement until decisive information is available.
Effective research programs are designed to seek the evidence needed to convince
a reasonable skeptic. Absolute skepticism is unsustainable, but credulity—the will-
ingness to believe anything—is pointless, as, without some degree of questioning, it
is impossible for knowledge to progress.
Skepticism is key to good science. For an idea to survive, other researchers must be
persuaded of its relevance and correctness—not with rhetoric, but in the established
framework of a scientific publication. New ideas must be explained clearly to give
them the best possible chance of being understood, believed, remembered, and used.
This begins with the task of explaining our ideas to the person at the next desk, or even
to ourselves. It ends with publication, that is, an explanation of results to the research
community. Thus good writing is a crucial part of the process of good science.
Using This Topic
There are many good general topics on writing style and research methods, but
the conventions of style vary from discipline to discipline, and broad guidance on
science writing can be wrong or irrelevant for a specific area. Some topics—such
as algorithms, mathematics, and research methods for computer science—are not
discussed in these topics at all.
The role of this topic is to help computer scientists with their writing and research.
For novices, it introduces the elements of a scientific paper and reviews a wide range
1
Which is why codes of scientific conduct typically require that scientists not publicize their
discoveries until after the work has been refereed.
