This is a response to Jamie-Lee Keith’s post https://create.twu.ca/jlkeith/learning-activity-10-3/
Question: Would you, a consumer, be less inclined to take a highly credible journal article as legitimate if it was by someone who once published something subpar?
My answer would be it depends. I like this question because Jamie-Lee has implicitly mentioned that checking the previous studies of the authors is a good way to examine the credibility of the current study and the researchers. As to this question, I would not be less inclined or more inclined. First, I think the evaluation is a much more comprehensive work than we think it would be. It is just like the decision-making procedure which evidently comprises the consideration of many aspects and personal preferences. Therefore, it is necessary and reasonable to consider the previous work. Second, this question contains the evaluation of one’s history. And I think history is more of a reference value. Anything happened in one’s past just represents the past and cannot completely serve as the standard for judging him right now. Third, I would find out the situation when the subpar research was conducted, gather all the details of that research such as where was the author and what he or she was doing at that time, and explore the reason of this study being subpar. In addition, the social context should be added to the consideration. There might be the possibility of the author being compromised by some organizations or the government at that time, just like the examples illustrated in the TED by Ben Goldacre. Definitely, the author was untrustworthy at that time and that study was under performed. But if the current study could stand up to the open scrutiny and is evaluated authentic and credible, then I deem that it is a highly credible journal article and use it for reference without hesitation.