standards of research

[David Bryant]

Some thoughts for discussion!

The study of bells is one which has no accepted research frameworks, and
consequently studies of bell installations vary widely, reflecting the
interests and experiences of their author. For example, some authors favour
a lot of documnentary research into the history of the bells in a particular
tower and some, such as myself, are more interested in the technical aspects
of what is there now. The quality of research can also vary widely, and
although it is fortunately usually the case that only good-quality work
reaches publication, this is by no means always the case and I am sure we
can all think of some truly appalling books not worth the paper they're
printed on.

The internet, of couse, suffers from this to an even greater degree. It is
only necessary to look at some of the complete drivel on 'bell
details/history' sections of individual tower websites to see what I mean! I
won't pick on individual examples, but a number can be found by following
the links on Roger Bailey's page.

So what do people think? Is there any way we can set and encourage standards
in research?

David