That’s not even a question, it never should be. I think if you can help it, you should do your best to set aside your biases in whatever the context may be, whether it’s about research or a stand point. Biases can complicate things and do not allow the full picture to be painted.
In the case of my research proposal, I truly don’t believe that I have any biases. It’s hard to when you don’t have a lot of knowledge on the subject.
My hypothesis is that an increase in the use of SIS (safe injection sites) will increase the success rate of young females who then went into a rehabilitation facility.
There is no proof really that SIS increase or decrease drug injection usage. It has been shown time and time again that there are multiple benefits to SIS, including preventing many overdoses and deaths, but in terms of rehabilitation and a successful one at that, there is no information. Again, my beliefs are that there is a direct positive relationship between SIS and successful rehabilitation, but I think that’s more so just looking at all the benefits of SIS’s over the downfalls.
I think our terminology and the way we phrase certain things, whether verbally or in writing, definitely can come off as biased. You see it all the time in the media: some news stations are more right winged and some are left, and you can usually tell just by the headlines of the news they are talking about. I think as researchers, policy advocates or just writers, we need to be aware of how we word things in our articles and make sure to avoid any kind biases.
Justyna Wolek 