Table of Contents

1: Introduction. 2: The Practice of Social Science: Implications for Researcher Accountability. 2.1. Introduction. 2.2. Positivism as a Way of Defining the Practice of Science. 2.3. Critical Rationalism as a Way of Defining the Practice of Science. 2.4. Scientific Realism as a Way of Defining the Practice of Science. 2.5. Interpretivism as a Way of Defining the Practice of Science. 2.6. Critical Theory as a Way of Defining the Practice of Science. 2.7. Anti-foundationalist Feminism as a Way of Defining the Practice of Science. 2.8. Conclusion. 3: A Reconsideration of Constructivism: Discursive Accountability Explored. 3.1. Introduction. 3.2. Discursively-oriented Constructivism as a Way of Defining the Practice of Science. 3.3. A Review of the Debates. 3.4. Conclusion. 4: Exploring Experimentation. 4.1. Introduction. 4.2. The Benefits of Recategorization (Dovidio et al., 1997). 4.3. Exploring Alternative Assessments of the Example. 4.4. Conclusion. 5: Exploring Survey Research. 5.1. Introduction. 5.2. The Evaluation of Abet at Unisa (Romm et al., 1998). 5.3. Exploring Alternative Assessments of the Example. 5.4. Conclusion. 6: Exploring the Ethnographic Study of Lives. 6.1. Introduction. 6.2. Inheritance Practice and Law in Swaziland (Aphane et al., 1993). 6.3. Exploring Alternative Assessments of the Example. 6.4. Conclusion. 7: Exploring Action Research. 7.1. Introduction. 7.2. Action Research Within the Management of Public Sector Services (Weil, 1998). 7.3. Exploring Alternative Assessments of the Example. 7.4. Conclusion. 8: Conclusion: Accounting for Different Conceptions of Accountability in Social Research. 8.1. Introduction. 8.2. Social Research as Doing Science. 8.3. Accounting for Experimentation. 8.4. Accounting for Survey Research. 8.5. Accounting for Ethnographic Research. 8.6. Accounting for Action Research. 8.7. Defending Research Processes and Reporting on Their Products. 8.8. Addressing Others' Arguments. List of Tables: Table 1: the Development of Positions in Response to Positivism. Table 2: Comparing Visions of Acceptable Research Practice. List of Figures: Figure 1: Layout of Chapters and Summary of Their Contents. Figure 2: a Locating of Arguments on Accountability. Figure 3: Accounting for Social Research in Terms of Process and Product. Figure 4: Dovidio et al.'s Experiment. Figure 5: Romm et al.'s Evaluation. Figure 6: Aphane et al.'s Ethnographic Study. Figure 7: Weil's Critically Reflexive Action Research (Crar) Project.