Scielo RSS <![CDATA[South African Journal of Science]]> vol. 116 num. SPE lang. en <![CDATA[SciELO Logo]]> <![CDATA[<b>Intellectual and social critique: The role of the <i>South African Journal of Science</i></b>]]> <![CDATA[<b>The Anatomy of a Bad Science: Reflections on Nattrass' 'commentary'</b>]]> <![CDATA[<b>Academics have a duty to exercise responsible scholarship</b>]]> <![CDATA[<b>Black - and not offended</b>]]> <![CDATA[<b>Misinterpretation of why black students do not pursue studies in the biological sciences</b>]]> <![CDATA[<b>A question worth asking</b>]]> <![CDATA[<b><i>#BlackLivesMatter, </i>even in research: A call to researchers to take a knee</b>]]> <![CDATA[<b>We object to Bad Science: Poor research practices should be discouraged!</b>]]> <![CDATA[<b>Bad science cannot be used as a basis of constructive dialogue: Response to Prof Nicoli Nattrass commentary</b>]]> <![CDATA[<b>Intellectual laziness and academic dishonesty: A threat to academic freedom?</b>]]> <![CDATA[<b>Attitudinal difference surveys perpetuate harmful tropes: A comment on Nattrass, <i>S. Afr. J. Sci.</i></b>]]> <![CDATA[<b>Response to Commentary: 'Why are black South African students less likely to consider studying biological sciences?' (Prof. N Nattrass)</b>]]> <![CDATA[<b>Research into human cognition, attitudes, and beliefs requires a social sciences approach</b>]]> <![CDATA[<b>In defence of exploratory research: A reply to critics</b>]]> My Commentary 'Why are black South African students less likely to consider studying biological sciences?' (S Afr J Sci. 2020;116(5/6)) has been criticised on a variety of grounds. Many of these involve misrepresentations or misunderstandings of my research. Some appear to be rooted in hostility towards quantitative social science paradigms. Many condemn what they see as racist assumptions and interpretations. I defend my explicitly exploratory research, showing that the research design was in line with standards for such research and was rooted in well-established existing literatures. I dispute that my research was in any way racist or entailed racial essentialism. Rather, it emphasized that attitudes and beliefs were better predictors of study and career choices than self-identified racial identities per se. I defend the analysis of the 'red-green divide', materialism, attitudes to wildlife and experience of pets and attitudes on other issues. I acknowledge some useful suggestions for further and fuller research to enhance an evidence-based understanding of the challenges of transformation facing the University of Cape Town and the conservation sector more broadly.