Transparency & selection of sources for scientific work

However, scientific work also means making your own path to answering the research question transparent and comprehensible to the potential reader. It must therefore be disclosed in what way, that is, by means of which methods and with the aid of which sources knowledge was gained. If one refers to independently performed research work, it is therefore necessary to justify one’s own approach and, if possible, to make it reproducible. On the other hand, if one takes into account research materials of others for one’s own reasoning, for example literature, which has finally been found in the literature search, strict citation rules apply. The citation of foreign works without making this clear, is accordingly “theft of intellectual property” and then holds no plagiarism test.

But not only the right citation, also on the right selection of sources, it depends. It is of course important for your own research to know the current state of knowledge on the topic. Secondary literature must therefore be rolled in order to be able to be used in answering one’s own question. Because in preparation for a thesis usually, however, much more is read, as is actually useful, you must then carefully filter the sources. Not all knowledge can and should eventually be included in the text.

Scientific work: objectivity and objectivity of the arguments

Two other quality criteria for scientific work are objectivity and objectivity. Instead of indiscriminate assumptions or impetuous explanations, reasoned arguments must therefore be given to answer the research question. Subjective opinions and judgments as well as pathos and polemics therefore have no place in a scientific text of the thesis. Objective, on the other hand, is a statement whenever it is independently substantiated by the observer and explained logically (see the definition of objectivity in the Gabler economic glossary).

The aim of a research project is therefore not to persuade or manipulate the potential reader, but to convince him by a good scientific quality. However, should a personal, judgmental opinion be unavoidable from time to time, it should in any case be made clear as such. Incidentally, objectivity and objectivity do not necessarily lead to a dust-dry writing style. Rhetoric finesse and one or the other dramaturgical gimmick have finally harmed any thesis.

After all, scientific work is not a mystery, but a technique that follows clear rules. The aim of this set of rules is then a relevant, precisely formulated research question and a logical way to answer it – with the help of correctly cited sources and objective arguments. Not to be underestimated is the practice effect. Knowing the basic rules and having enough time to internalize them – this is the Masterplan, which then leads to successful homework, bachelor thesis, master thesis or dissertation.