Tourism Researchery in a State of Turbulence: Time for Great Repair and Renewal?

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 20 Sayı: 2, 347 - 367, 29.08.2023

Atila Yuksel

https://doi.org/10.24010/soid.1351285

Öz

Is tourism research at a standstill, or is it progressing or regressing? The answer is not so simple because of the strong neurosis surrounding tourism research, which requires immediate action. There are a number of false truths (i.e. research traditions and practices that are continued even though they are controversial) that are only visible to those who can bother to notice them. One of the things that surprises me most in this academic turmoil is those who un/knowingly and un/willingly perpetuate the false truths, even though they know they are controversial. As far as tourism research is concerned, I think that if we want to understand tourism research and advance it, these current apathetic behaviours towards widespread misconduct and false truths should also be part of the sub-theme of the tourism discipline. This case report aims to discuss both the nature and causes of the neurosis, and how to respond to it or, at best, overcome it, focusing on potential and actual issues directly relevant to the research world in turbulence. For a variety of reasons, tourism researchers, like their counterparts in other disciplines are very, if not entirely, concerned about publishing, but less concerned about their social or educational influence. All that seems to matter is the score of publication, citation, fame and prestige. As researchers, we are more concerned with the impact factor of journals and articles than with analysing basic educational problems or social injustices in our field. Yet, despite all this bravado, research-related problems in our field continue to grow rapidly (see reports on accelerating rates of research misconduct, article retractions, and the proportion of meaningless research and its costs to the economy in general and the environment in particular). There is no doubt that producing more publications does not advance science or solve problems. (While 90% of research has focused on business-related issues, nothing seems to have changed as tourism business continues to face similar problems.) This is a significant dilemma, but not one that most researchers are concerned about. Tourism researchers, again like their counterparts in other disciplines, are still more likely to research topics that have publication potential than those that do not. Frankly, are we making a research decision on the basis of altruism or egoism? There is a major problem with tourism academia in that researchers are more concerned with publishing than with doing meaningful science. Until the frenzy of meaningless research and lust for publication ends, all these efforts will only serve to expand the garbage dump on the surface of the knowledge base. Finally, science is drowned in orthodox rules or how to publish in SSCI journals at the cost of losing academic freedom, authentic self and the research spirit. The vital questions that remain are: what does the researcher want to achieve internally not just externally, what is it worth doing, and for whom? Just as it is different to have food casually and to enjoy having it with enthusiasm, so it will be different to do research casually and to enjoy research with wise pleasure and enthusiasm, giving one's whole authentic self.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Tourism Researchery, Time for Great Repair, Renewal

Kaynakça

• Alvesson, M. & Gabriel, Y. (2013). Beyond Formulaic Research: In Praise of Greater Diversity in Organizational Research and Publications. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 12(2): 245–263
• Alvesson, M. & Spicer, (A.) (Un)Conditional surrender? Why do professionals willingly comply with managerialism. Journal of Organizational Change Management 29(1): 29-45
• Alvesson, M. Gabriel, Y., & Paulsen, R. (2017). Return to Meaning A Social Science with Something to Say. Oxford University Press.
• Ayikoru, M (2009). 
Epistemology, Ontology and Tourism. Philosophical Issues in Tourism Tribe, J (ed). Channel View Publications.
• Bacon, F. (1620). “Novum Organum”. In The Philosophy of the 16thand 17thCenturies, edited by R. Popkin, 1996, pp. 83–84, New York: Free Press

• Barnacle, R. (2005). Research education ontologies: Exploring doctoral becoming. Higher Education Research & Development, 24(2), 179–188.
• Barnacle, R. (2005). Research education ontologies: Exploring doctoral becoming. Higher Education Research & Development, 24(2), 179–188.
• Bauman, Z. (2000). Liquid Modernity. Polity Press.
• Bell, H. (2000). Scientific publishing, 17th-century style: precepts of Francis Bacon. Learned Publishing (2000)13, 124–126
• Benis, W. & O’Toole. (2005). How Business Schools Lost Their Way. Harvard Business review. May.
• Braud, W. (1998). Can research be Transpersonal? Transpersonal Psychology Review, - 2(3): pp. 9-17.
• Bueno, E. Chen &, Fagan, R.M. (2019). Individuation, Process, and Scientific Practices. In Bueno, E. Chen &, Fagan, R.M. (Eds) - Individuation, Process, and Scientific Practices-Oxford University Press.
• Cevizci, A. (2012). Felsefe. Anadolu Üniversitesi Yayınları
• Claxton, G. (1991). Educating the Inquiring Mind: The Challenge for School Science. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
• Conner, D. C. (2005). Halkın bilim tarihi. Madenciler, ebeler ve basit tamirciler. Tübiak, Popüler bilim Kitapları.
• Czarniawska-Joerges, B. & Monthoux, G. P. (2005). Good Novels Better Management: Reading organizational studies. Harwood Academic Publishers.
• Descartes, R. (2010) Felsefenin İlkeleri. Çev. Mesut Akın, İstanbul: Say Yayınları,
• Dupre, J. (2019). Processes, Organisms, Kinds, and the Inevitability of Pluralism. In Bueno, E. Chen &, Fagan, R.M. (Eds) - Individuation, Process, and Scientific Practices-Oxford University Press.
• Dyson, F. (2008). Scientist as Rebel. New York Review Book.
• Fals Borda, O. (2001). Participatory (Action) Research in Social Theory: Origins and
Challenges 27 Orlando, in Peter Reason, Hilary Bradbury - Handbook of Action Research Participative Inquiry and Practice-Sage Publications Ltd.
• Galison, P. ( 1997). Image and Logic. A material culture of Microphysics.
• Habermas, J. (1987) Knowledge and Human Interests (J. Shapiro, trans.). Cambridge: Polity Press.
• Hubbard, D. & Lindsay, M. (2012). From significant difference to significant sameness: Proposing a paradigm shift in business research. Journal of Business Research.
• Ioannidis JPA (2005). Why Most Published Research Findings Are False. PLoS Med 2(8): e124.
• Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2007). Limitations are not properly acknowledged in the scientific literature. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60, 324e329.

• Forgas, J. & Baumeister, RF. (2009). The Psychology of Self-Regulation: Cognitive, Affective, and Motivational Processes. The Sydney Symposium of Social Psychology, ed. D Tice, pp. 249–69. New York: Psychol. Press
• Jung, C. G. (1965). Memories, dreams, reflections. New York: Vintage.

• Jussim, L., Stevens, S. T., Honeycut, N., Anglin, S. & Fox, N. (2019). Scientific Gullibility. In Forgas, P. J. & Baumeister, R. F. (Eds). The Social Psychology of Gullibility: Fake News, Conspiracy Theories, and Irrational Beliefs. Routledge.
• Kucuradi, Ioanna (2017). Yüzyilimizda Insan Felsefesi. Takiyettin Mengüsoglu'nun Anisina,
• Kuhn, T. S. (1962/1996). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 3rd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Macilwain, C. (2013). Halt the avalanche of performance metrics. Nature 500, 255. https://doi.org/10.1038/500255a
• Maxwell, N. (1984). From Knowledge to Wisdom. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
• Maxwell, N. (2003) Do philosophers love wisdom, The Philosophers’ Magazine, 22, 22– 24.

• Maxwell, N. (2004) Is science neurotic? (London, Imperial College Press).

• Maxwell, N. (2007). From Knowledge to Wisdom: The Need for an Academic Revolution. in R. Barnett and N. Maxwell, eds., Wisdom in the University, Routledge 2008. See also London Review of Education, 5, 2007, pp. 97-115.)
• Maxwell, N. (2010). Cutting God in Half – And Putting the Pieces Together Again: A New Approach to Philosophy, Pentire Press, London,
• Morse, J. M. (2005). Editorial: Qualitative research is not a modification of quantitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 15(8), 1003–1005.

• Muller, J. Z (2015). Tyranny of Metrics. Princeton University Press.
• November, P. (2004). Seven reasons why marketing practitioners should ignore marketing academic research. Australasian Marketing Journal, 12(2), 39–50.
• Poland, J. & Tekin, Ş. (2017). Psychiatric Research and Extraordinary Science. In Jeffrey Poland and Şerife Tekin (Eds). Extraordinary Science and Psychiatry: Responses to the Crisis in Mental Health Research, The MIT Press
Cambridge, Massachusetts
• Russu, S. M. (2014). Literary fiction and social science. Two partially overlapping magisteria. Journal of Comparative Research in Anthropology and Sociology. 5(2): 133-152.
• Mertkan, Ş. & Bayrakli, H. (2018) Re-inventing researcher identity: when the individual interacts with the contextual power dynamics, Higher Education Research & Development, 37:2, 316-327,
• Spry, T. (2001). Performing auto ethnography: An embodied methodological praxis. Qualitative Inquiry, 7(6), 706–732.

• Sunar, C. (1971). Parmenides ve Varlık Meselesi. 19, 1:
• SwafS, Horizon (2020). Available from https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/h2020-section/science-and- society
• Thomson, P., & Gunter, H. (2011). Inside, outside, upside down: The fluidity of academic researcher ‘identity’ in working with/in school. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 34(1), 17–30.

• Timuçin A. (2002). Felsefe Sözlüğü.İstanbul: Bulut Yayınları.
• Trevors, J & Pollack, Gerald & Saier, Milton & Masson, Luke. (2012). Transformative research: Definitions, approaches and consequences. Theory in biosciences = Theorie in den Biowissenschaften. 131. 117-23. 10.1007/s12064-012-0154-3.
• Ülman, B., Balta-Paker, E., & Ağcan, A.M. (2011). “Uluslararası” Fikri, Epistemolojik Yanılgı ve Eleştirel Gerçekliğin İmkânları Uluslararası İlişkiler 8, 30: 15-41
• Vana J. (2020a). More than just a product: Strengthening literature in sociological analysis. Sociology Compass
• Vana, J. (2020b). Theorizing the Social Through Literary Fiction: For a New Sociology of Literature. Cultural Sociology. 14(2) 180–200
• Waite, D. (2014). Teaching the unteachable: Some issues of qualitative research pedagogy. Qualitative Inquiry, 20(3), 267–281.

• Watson, P. (2005). Ideas: a history of thought and invention, from fire to Freud. New York, HarperCollins.
• Willmott, H. (1995). Managing the academics: Commodification and control of university education in the UK. Human Relations, 48(9), 993–1028.
• Wilner, P. (1985). The main drift of sociology between 1936 and 1982, History of Sociology, 5 (2): 1–20.