Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The higher the quality of evidence the more likely is a strong recommendation. Benefits and harms and burden: This requires an evaluation of the absolute effects of both the benefits and harms and their importance. The greater the net benefit or net harm the more likely is a strong recommendation for or against the option. Resource implications
A systematic review focuses on a specific research question to identify, appraise, select, and synthesize all high-quality research evidence and arguments relevant to that question. A meta-analysis is typically a systematic review using statistical methods to effectively combine the data used on all selected studies to produce a more reliable ...
Use of the phrase "working hypothesis" goes back to at least the 1850s. [7]Charles Sanders Peirce came to hold that an explanatory hypothesis is not only justifiable as a tentative conclusion by its plausibility (by which he meant its naturalness and economy of explanation), [8] but also justifiable as a starting point by the broader promise that the hypothesis holds for research.
The discussion of background assumptions can include metaphysical and ontological issues in cases where they have important implications for the proper research methodology. For example, a realist perspective considering the observed phenomena as an external and independent reality is often associated with an emphasis on empirical data ...
Position papers in academia enable discussion on emerging topics without the experimentation and original research normally present in an academic paper. Commonly, such a document will substantiate the opinions or positions put forward with evidences from an extensive objective discussion of the topic.
The hearer can now draw the contextual implications that +> Susan needs to be cheered up. +> Peter wants me to ring Susan and cheer her up. If Peter intended the hearer to come to these implications, they are implicated conclusions. Implicated premises and conclusions are the two types of implicatures in the relevance theoretical sense. [51]
Scholarly peer review or academic peer review (also known as refereeing) is the process of having a draft version of a researcher's methods and findings reviewed (usually anonymously) by experts (or "peers") in the same field.
Implicature, what is suggested in an utterance, even though neither expressed nor strictly implied; Implicational universal or linguistic universal, a pattern that occurs systematically across natural languages