4 ms·

I welcome authors who lay out their assumptions and definitions before they construct their argument. We see exactly the same in mathematics and we're obligated

I welcome authors who lay out their assumptions and definitions before they construct their argument. We see exactly the same in mathematics and we're obligated to generalize the same standard and flexibility to other sciences. I can't count the number of times I've read a math paper which says to the effect, "If the axiom of choice is true then such and such follows." In some ways math has even greater liberty in terms of conjectures - statements assumed true until proven. All I'm asking is for logical consistency where math and other sciences are held to the same standards regardless of what they are.

xpe 4y ago
I agree that laying out assumptions are essential and foundational and should be demanded of all serious academic work. That said, different disciplines have different standards and practices about what should be surfaced. Two examples: 1. Anthropologists describe the context and behaviors of a society. They can aspire to neutrality, but they are biased observers, in terms of what they notice and comment on. This is why it is especially useful for the observer to reflect on their preconceived notions and be transparent about them. This allows the reader to better understand what the "lens" observes. 2. I believe that all papers using statistical models should be fully transparent about, at least: (1) preconceived notions about what associations the authors thought would exist; and (2) how many functional forms were tried and discarded before arriving at the models used for the published results.