Is There a Difference in Standards for Explanatory Practice?

Could it be that because of something about your kind of epistemic context or goals you pick out some aspect of a story is being explanatory correct? I don't see a whole lot of evidence in the in science for there being a genuine difference in standards. It's not like people are just asking slightly different questions they had genuinely giving different answers to the same question. Or, or alternatively, they're disagreements that when you look more closely out really disagree at all.