Understanding (un)certainty in human geographic quantitative spatial analysis – commentary to Tulumello
This commentary reflects uncertainty in human geographic quantitative spatial analysis within the context of Simone Tulumello’s essay (in this issue). Epistemologically, positivism, logical empiricism and behaviourism must be understood as historical stages in the evolution of quantitative human geo...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Geographical Society of Finland
2019-04-01
|
| Series: | Fennia: International Journal of Geography |
| Online Access: | https://fennia.journal.fi/article/view/80216 |
| _version_ | 1818001589164572672 |
|---|---|
| author | Ossi Kotavaara |
| author_facet | Ossi Kotavaara |
| author_sort | Ossi Kotavaara |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | This commentary reflects uncertainty in human geographic quantitative spatial analysis within the context of Simone Tulumello’s essay (in this issue). Epistemologically, positivism, logical empiricism and behaviourism must be understood as historical stages in the evolution of quantitative human geography, even though the analytical legacy is clear. A more recognisable quantitative methodological framework, related to post-millennial human geographic studies, seeks sufficient evidence, which supports or refutes a particular line of thought. In general, the consideration of uncertainty and error is deeply tied to the methodological knowledge in quantitative analysis. Regardless of methodology or discipline, however, the risks of reporting over-certainty or clear misconduct are essential ethical questions. Uncertainty is linked also to the limits of conceptualisation and information catchment, but robust information revealing otherwise-hidden patterns is often highly valuable. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-14T03:35:12Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-f564fc4f38dc41d9b76d5706212a0a71 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1798-5617 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-14T03:35:12Z |
| publishDate | 2019-04-01 |
| publisher | Geographical Society of Finland |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Fennia: International Journal of Geography |
| spelling | doaj.art-f564fc4f38dc41d9b76d5706212a0a712022-12-22T02:14:47ZengGeographical Society of FinlandFennia: International Journal of Geography1798-56172019-04-01197110.11143/fennia.80216Understanding (un)certainty in human geographic quantitative spatial analysis – commentary to TulumelloOssi KotavaaraThis commentary reflects uncertainty in human geographic quantitative spatial analysis within the context of Simone Tulumello’s essay (in this issue). Epistemologically, positivism, logical empiricism and behaviourism must be understood as historical stages in the evolution of quantitative human geography, even though the analytical legacy is clear. A more recognisable quantitative methodological framework, related to post-millennial human geographic studies, seeks sufficient evidence, which supports or refutes a particular line of thought. In general, the consideration of uncertainty and error is deeply tied to the methodological knowledge in quantitative analysis. Regardless of methodology or discipline, however, the risks of reporting over-certainty or clear misconduct are essential ethical questions. Uncertainty is linked also to the limits of conceptualisation and information catchment, but robust information revealing otherwise-hidden patterns is often highly valuable.https://fennia.journal.fi/article/view/80216 |
| spellingShingle | Ossi Kotavaara Understanding (un)certainty in human geographic quantitative spatial analysis – commentary to Tulumello Fennia: International Journal of Geography |
| title | Understanding (un)certainty in human geographic quantitative spatial analysis – commentary to Tulumello |
| title_full | Understanding (un)certainty in human geographic quantitative spatial analysis – commentary to Tulumello |
| title_fullStr | Understanding (un)certainty in human geographic quantitative spatial analysis – commentary to Tulumello |
| title_full_unstemmed | Understanding (un)certainty in human geographic quantitative spatial analysis – commentary to Tulumello |
| title_short | Understanding (un)certainty in human geographic quantitative spatial analysis – commentary to Tulumello |
| title_sort | understanding un certainty in human geographic quantitative spatial analysis commentary to tulumello |
| url | https://fennia.journal.fi/article/view/80216 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT ossikotavaara understandinguncertaintyinhumangeographicquantitativespatialanalysiscommentarytotulumello |