Sutherland H J, Meslin E M, da Cunha R, Till J E
Division of Epidemiology & Statistics, Ontario Cancer Institute/Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, Canada.
Soc Sci Med. 1993 Dec;37(12):1427-30. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(93)90176-5.
The research question is a crucial aspect of every study. Criteria for the evaluation of the merit of the study question or hypothesis have received surprisingly little attention. A set of non-methodological criteria derived from interviews with 40 researchers (clinical investigators and laboratory scientists) is presented. For both types of researcher, the terms that best described the nature of the criteria included potential impact, justification, feasibility, track record, innovation, intuitive response, aesthetics and politics. The latter three criteria are notably subjective; however all the criteria have an element of non-objectivity. There may well be a reluctance to openly acknowledge that crucial choices about what scientific questions should be explored involve criteria which are themselves not 'objective', and indeed, not even 'scientific'.
研究问题是每项研究的关键方面。对研究问题或假设价值的评估标准却出奇地很少受到关注。本文提出了一组从对40名研究人员（临床研究人员和实验室科学家）的访谈中得出的非方法学标准。对于这两类研究人员来说，最能描述这些标准性质的术语包括潜在影响、合理性、可行性、过往记录、创新性、直观反应、美学和政治性。后三个标准明显具有主观性；然而，所有标准都有非客观性的成分。很可能人们不愿公开承认，关于应该探索哪些科学问题的关键选择所涉及的标准本身并非“客观”，甚至并非“科学”。
