Life Sciences Commons^™

Additional Thoughts On Rigor In Wildlife Science: Unappreciated Impediments, John A. Bissonette

Wildland Resources Faculty Publications

Traditionally, most scientists accepted reductionist and mechanistic approaches as the rigorous way to do science. Sells et al. (2018) recently raised the argument about reliability in wildlife science. Chamberlin (1890), Platt (1964), Romesburg (1981, 1991, 2009), and Williams (1997) were rightly referenced as very influential papers. My intention in this letter is not to refute the essence of the Sells et al. (2018) commentary but to add seldom addressed but important aspects that influence the attainment of rigor and certainty in wildlife studies. The elements of …