Questioning Authorized Truth: Resisting the Pull of the Policy Audience and Fostering Critical Scholarship in Correctional Medical Research—A Reply to Kerle et al.
Response or Comment
We encourage all interested parties to read our article (Vaughn and Smith 1999) and not rely on Kerle, Stojkovic, Kiekbusch, and Rowan's (1999) misrepresentations, distortions, selective inclusions, and inartful articulations. We agree with Kerle et al. that there is much misunderstanding at work here; indeed, Kerle et al. misunderstand the purpose, scope, intent, and methodological underpinning of our article. Kerle et al. are confused about (1) the scope of our data, (2) fundamentals of building an inductive argument through interpretative analysis, (3) how to define key concepts, (4) basic research methodology, and (5) what it means to offer a more balanced view. We address each of these concerns.
Vaughn, M. S., & Smith, L. G. (1999). Questioning authorized truth: Resisting the pull of the policy audience and fostering critical scholarship in correctional medical research—A reply to Kerle et al. Justice Quarterly, 16(4), 907-918. doi:10.1080/07418829900094421