This theoretical article explores the role of implicit conceptions in scientific research, focusing on how these hidden frameworks influence the design, execution, and interpretation of studies. Drawing on the concept of tacit knowledge (Polanyi 1966; Malik 2023), it examines how researchers’ intuitive and non-verbalizable understandings shape their theoretical, methodological, and collaborative practices. The discussion is structured around four dimensions: tacit knowledge as an epistemological foundation, researcher identity, contextual influences, including paradigmatic and epistemological tensions, and the assessment and monitoring of implicit conceptions. The article emphasizes the need for epistemological flexibility, encouraging researchers to navigate positivist, interpretative, and critical paradigms based on the phenomenon under study. It critiques the “publish or perish” logic, advocating for prioritizing quality and knowledge advancement over market pressures. By adopting interdisciplinary and transversal approaches, researchers can address complex phenomena more comprehensively. Finally, the article highlights the importance of lifelong and cross-disciplinary training to equip researchers for contemporary scientific challenges while fostering innovation and adaptability.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bruno et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: