ABSTRACT

The construction of our argument so far about PBE is that it is a relatively unique form of research. The term ‘research’ is itself contested and used to describe a range of activities that differ in the sorts of ways we have outlined in the previous chapters. Variations and differences tend to create disagreements about what does and does not count as research. We want to emphasize the point in this chapter that this is more than esoteric debate. The label ‘research’ affects peoples’ perception of an activity and any claim to worth or knowledge that accompanies that activity. The appellation ‘research’ tends to bestow credibility on an activity that may, on closer scrutiny, be undeserving. We have sought to relate PBE to the criteria of credibility and admissibility by identifying it as a process that involves systematic data gathering, a process of analysis that leads to the production of factual rather than fictitious information, and a process that is useful to the practitioner-researcher in his or her occupational context. In the sections that follow we want to examine further the justificatory character of this orientation.