Avoiding opinion in academic writing

Ah: the joys of academic writing. It is quite difficult to clearly show students why it is so important that we avoid using our own opinion, or our experience, as 'evidence' when we write in academia. 

I think that the following example is helpful, however. We can approach "academic writing [like] being [in] a court of law. [Your mark]er is the judge. You [the writer] are the young prosecutor. You call witnesses (sources) to give evidence that helps build your case. You must question and dispute the stories of the witnesses and lawyers for the other side" (Mewburn et al., 2018, p. 28). I think this great explanation helps me a lot to explain the purpose of using evidence - and not opinion - to students. If we imagine a courtroom, it becomes clear why our opinion can be unhelpful, and why we need to use experts (as per the illustration accompanying this post; Newnes, 1891, p. 532). If we have watched TV courtroom dramas, it is clear how third parties are used in the process. 

In academic writing, our courtroom experts are peer-reviewed evidence from journals. This is because academic writing needs to be underpinned by reliable, objective evidence. It is not a political opinion piece: it is reliable, careful, and systematic argument (Bennett, 1991), clearly drawing on sound quality peer-reviewed articles and chapters. We cite to show the bones of our reading, and to make careful, balanced claims by using hedging language (read more on that here).

Our written work should be a synthesis of the views of experts; those with whom we agree; those with whom we do not agree and we may critique by calling "in the ‘opposition’; witnesses [we] can cross-examine who might disagree with" the argument we have are building, politely questioning their views (Mewburn et al., 2018, p. 28). We ensure that we have our systematic and careful researcher hat on (Bennett, 1991) when selecting appropriate, credible, and balanced sources to form our argument. We don't call on the discredited voices in our field; we call on those with credibility.  

Then, like a necklace of beads, our job is simply (!) to string together our argument in a cogent way, making sense of the components for those who view it... and - hopefully - those who admire it. And those whom we can persuade by our elegant argument to agree with it.

We must remember that all the citations we embed  and the references they arise from "are magic [...] little nuggets, hidden in brackets and footnotes, that confer power and protection to researchers" (Mewburn et al., 2018, p. 30). They aid us, who use those magic nuggets in our writing. They show that we have drawn on experts; they show what has shaped our thinking; they show the breadth of the field that we have covered; they show we have cast our net widely; they show that we are current in our thinking. "Names, names, names", darling (Plowman, 1992). 

Students often ask me why they can't use their own experience. It is largely because we haven't built up our own experience in a structured, objective and measured way; our learning is rarely accumulated in the organised way we that would conduct a scholarly research project. Because of that, we will see our experience through our own biases. Some biases will be unconscious - it is likely that we do not see 'all' of ourselves, as per the JoHari window (Luft, 1963; Luft & Ingham, 1955). Our 'blind area' is only evident to others, and two areas - the area we avoid, and the area of completely unknown activity - can be seen by no one; a serious limitation in trying to objectively assess patterns from memory (Luft, 1963). While we might use our own experience to shape our introduction (a "why I am interested in this" statement), our personal research expertise is simply not a strong enough foundation on which to build academic argument.

And, by drawing on real research experts, we show our growing understanding of our field.

Sam

References:

Bennett, R. (1991). Chapter 5: What is Management Research? in N. Smith, P. Dainty (Eds.), The Management Research Handbook (pp. 67-77). Routledge.

Mewburn, I., Firth, K., & Lehmann, S. (2018). How to Fix Your Academic Writing Trouble: A Practical Guide. Open University Press.

Luft, J. (1963). Group processes: An introduction to group dynamics. National Press.

Luft, J., & Ingham, H. (1955). The Johari Window: A Graphic Model for Interpersonal Relations. Western Training Laboratory in Group Development. University of California at Los Angeles, Extension Office.

Newnes, G. (1891). The Strand Magazine (Vol 1., p. 532). George Newnes & Co Ltd.

Plowman, J. (Producer). (1993). Fashion [TV programme]. Absolutely Fabulous, 1(1). BBC.