research method in qualitive research管理学定性研究方法课件

EvaluatingQualitativeManagementResearch:aContingentCriteriology.WorkshopNumber7ESRCWorkshopsforQualitativeResearchinManagementEvaluatingQualitativeManagem1IdentificationoftrainingneedInappropriateassessmentcriteriaisfrequentlyappliedtoqualitativeresearch.Concernsexistabouthowtoassessqualitativeresearch

Identificationoftrainingnee2Aims

Toillustratehowcompetingphilosophicalperspectivesunderpindifferentwaysofevaluatingmanagementresearchanddifferentresearchagendas;Toillustratethedangersofusingparticularevaluationcriteria,constitutedbyparticularphilosophicalconventions,toassessallmanagementresearch;Todevelopacontingentcriteriologywhereappropriateevaluationcriteriamightbeusedwhichvaryaccordingtothephilosophicalassumptionsinformingtheresearch.Aims

Toillustratehowcompeti3ObjectivesBytheendofthesessionyoushouldbeableto:Outlinetheproblemsassociatedwithcriteriologywithregardtocompetingprocessesofresearchevaluation;Explaintheconstitutiveandcontingentrelationshipbetweenphilosophicalassumptionsandthedevelopmentofdifferentevaluationcriteria;

Describethekeyevaluationcriteriarelevanttofourdifferentapproachestomanagementresearch.ObjectivesBytheendofthese4Historicaldominanceofquantitativemethodologyinanglophonecountries;Neverthelessqualitativemanagementresearchhasalongestablishedpedigree;Qualitativeresearchmanagementresearchcharacterizedby: substantivediversity; competingphilosophicalassumptions.Confusionariseswhenevaluationcriteriaconstitutedbyparticularphilosophicalconventionsareuniversallyappliedtothisheterogeneousfield;

Toavoidmisappropriationthereisaneedforacontingentcriteriology. Historicaldominanceofquanti5FourKeyApproachestoManagementResearch:

KnowledgeconstitutingassumptionsFourKeyApproachestoManagem6(1).Positivism

Popper’smodifiedpositivistmethodologyemphasizesobjectivityandunbiaseddatacollectioninordertotesthypothesesagainstanaccessibleindependentsocialrealityinordertoprotectagainst“fancifultheorizinginmanagementresearch”(Donaldson,1996:164).Hence4keyevaluationcriteria:Internalvalidity-whetherwhatareinterpretedasthe“causes”producethe“effects”inagivenpieceofresearch-necessitatescreating,orsimulating,conditionsofclosurewhichallowempiricaltesting;Constitutingevaluationcriteriainmanagementresearch(1).PositivismConstitutingev7Testinghypothesesrequirestheoperationalizationofabstractconceptscausallyrelatedbythetheoryintoindicatorsthatmeasurewhattheyaresupposedtomeasure-constructvalidity.Akeyconcernisexternalpopulationvalidity-generalizingfindingstoadefinedpopulationbeyondthoserespondentsparticipatingintheresearch.Needtopreservedistancebetweentheresearcherandtheresearched-reliabilityoffindingsthroughreplication-thisreferstotheconsistencyofresearchfindingsandreferstotheextenttowhichitispossibleforanotherresearcherto(i)replicatetheresearchdesignwithequivalentpopulations;(ii)findthesameresults.Testinghypothesesrequiresth8Task:Evaluatethedifferentresearchmethodsintermsoftheirrelativestrengthsinregardtothe4criteriabelow:Task:Evaluatethedifferentr9EcologicalValidity

“Doourinstrumentscapturethedailylifeconditions,opinions,values,attitudes,andknowledgebaseofthosewestudyasexpressedintheirnaturalhabitat?”(Cicourel,1982:15)Raisesquestionsaround:theextenttowhichthesocialsettinginwhichdatahasbeencollectedistypicalofinformants’normal“everyday”lives?areresearchfindingsartefactsofthesocialscientist’smethodsofdatacollectionandanalyticaltools?EcologicalValidity10(2)Neo-EmpiricismThroughverstehen,andthecollectionofqualitativedata,aimstoinductivelydevelopthickdescriptionsofthepatternsactorsusetomakesenseoftheirworlds-sometimestoalsogenerategroundedtheory.Butretainspositivistcommitmenttoobjectivityexpressednowasasubject-subjectdualism:“thethird-personpointofview”(Schwandt,1996:62).Thequestionisarethephilosophicaldifferenceswithpositivismseenassignificantwhenitcomestoevaluationsresearch? -ForLecompteandGoetz(1982)no-hencecanuseunreconstructedpositivistcriteria.VS -ForLincolnandGuba(1985)yes-henceemphasizethefollowing.....(2)Neo-Empiricism11Internalvaliditywithcredibility(authenticrepresentations);Externalvaliditywithtransferability(extentofapplicability);Reliabilitywithdependability(minimizationofresearcheridiosyncrasies);Objectivitywithconfirmability

(researcherself-criticism).MeanwhileMorse(1994)focusesupontheanalysisofqualitativedata....Comprehension(learningaboutasetting);Synthesizing(identifyingpatternsinthedata);Theorizing(explanationsthatfitthedata);Recontextualizing(abstractingemergenttheorytonewsettingandrelatingittoestablishedknowledge).researchmethodinqualitiveresearch管理学定性研究方法12Hammersley(1989;1990;1992)addstothesecriteriabydevelopinginternalreflexivity-

Researcher'scriticalscrutinizationoftheimpactoftheirfieldrole(s)uponresearchsettingsandfindingssoastoreducesourcesofcontaminationtherebyenhancingecologicalvalidity(i.e.naturalism).e.g.. -avoidoverrapportwithmembers; -treatsettingasanthropologicallystrange; -retainbalancebetweeninsiderandoutsider; -retainsocialandintellectualdistancetopreserveanalyticalspace.AsSeale(1999:161)-throughrevealingaspectsofthemselvesandtheresearchprocessasatraceableaudittrail,thequalitativeresearcherpersuadesreadersthatthey“canrelyonthewriter’shardwonobjectivity”therebyestablishingthecredibility,dependabilityandconfirmabilityoffindings.Butacontradictionwithinneo-empiricistinterpretivestanceandtheir“immaculateperception”-repudiationleadstosocialconstructionistapproaches.

Hammersley(1989;1990;1992)13(3).CriticalTheoryRejectionoftheoryneutralobservationallanguage;Kantianphilosophicallegacy;Democracyandreflexivityasepistemicstandards-keytoenablingthisisthedevelopmentofacriticalconsciousnesswhere... “...firsttounderstandtheideologicallydistortedsubjectivesituationofsomeindividualorgroup,secondtoexploretheforcesthathavecausedthatsituation,andthirdtoshowthattheseforcescanbeovercomethroughawarenessofthemonthepartoftheoppressedindividualorgroupinquestion”(Dryzek,1995:99).Epistemologicallylegitimateknowledgeariseswhereitistheoutcomeofempowereddemocraticcollectivedialogue.Thisleadstofivekeyevaluationcriteria....(3).CriticalTheory14e.g.KincheloeandMcLaren(1998)Reflexiveinterrogationbytheresearcheroftheepistemologicalbaggagetheybringwiththem;Throughacriticalethnographyresearchersattempttosensitizethemselvesandparticipantstohowhegemonicregimesoftruthimpactuponthesubjectivitiesofthedisadvantaged;Positivistconceptionofvalidityrejectedinfavourofthecredibilityofsociallyconstructedrealitiestothosewhohavedemocraticallyparticipatedintheirdevelopment;Generalizabilityrejectedinfavourofaccommodation-whereresearchers’usetheirknowledgeofarangeofcomparablecontextstoassesssimilaritiesanddifferences;Catalyticvalidity-extenttowhichresearchchangesthoseitstudiessothattheyunderstandtheworldinnewwaysandusethisknowledgetochangeit-linktopragmatistcriterionofpracticaladequacy.e.g.KincheloeandMcLaren(1915(4).PostmodernismEvaluationacontroversialissuehere-oftenwrittenoffasamodernistanachronism.Postmodernistseclecticaboutwhattheywantwhilstbeingrelativelyclearaboutwhattheyareagainst-e.g.criticaltheory’sessentialism.Neverthelessanythingdoesnotgo!andwecaninferfromsubjectivistepistemologicalandontologicalstancethefollowing...Arelativistposition-nogoodreasonsforpreferringonerepresentationoverothers...Hencemissionistoundermineanyclaimtoepistemologicalauthority,subvertconventionalwaysofthinkingand...Encouragepluralityandindeterminacy-anormativeagendabydefault..(4).Postmodernism16Resultsinseveralpossibleevaluationcriteria:Displayandunsettlethediscursiverulesofthegamethroughdeconstructiontorevealthosemeaningswhichhavebeensuppressed,sublimatedorforgottenandtherebydevelop;Atmostdeconstructioncanonlyevokealternativesocialconstructionsofrealitywithinatextwhichcanthemselvesbedeconstructed-hyper-reflexivity;Paralogy-needtodestabilizetheirownnarrativestoavoidtheacontrivedinvisibilityaroundtheauthorialpresencebehindthetextthatprivilegesthetextandencouragesdiscursiveclosure-decentringtheauthor;Theresult-apreference-lesstolerationofthepolyphonicorheteroglossia-wheremulti-vocalauthorsareempoweredtomanipulatesignifierstocreatenewtextualdomainsofintelligibilitywhicharethendestabilizedadinfinitum.Resultsinseveralpossibleev17researchmethodinqualitiveresearch管理学定性研究方法18Managementresearchembracesadiversearrayofpracticesdrivenbyvaryingknowledgeconstitutingassumptions;Thislegitimizesdistinctiveperspectives,researchagendasandpromulgatesparticularevaluationcriteria;Thereforetryingtoarticulateanallembracing,indisputable,setofregulativestandardstopolicemanagementresearchisbothaforlornhopeandanunfairpractice;Hencetheneedforacontingentcriteriologythatsensitizesmanagementresearcherstotheparticularqualityissuesthattheirownandothers’researchshouldaddress.Butthereareinstitutionalbarrierstoacontingentcriteriology-henceneedtobeconcernedabouthowandwhyinparticularsocialcontextscertainresearchpracticesaredeemedvaluablewhileothersarediscountedasvaluelessaberrations.ConclusionsManagementresearchembracesa19Futherreading:Bochner,A.P.(2000)CriteriaAgainstOurselves,QualitativeInquiry,6(2):266-272.Mitchell,T.R.(1985)AnEvaluationoftheValidityofCorrelationResearchConductedinOrganizations,AcademyofManagementReview,2:192-205.Scandura,T.A.andWilliams,E.A.(2000)“ResearchMethodologyinManagement:CurrentPractices,Trends,andImplicationsforFutureResearch”,AcademyofManagementJournal43(6)1248-1264.Cronbach,L.J.&Meehl,P.E.(1955)Constructvalidityinpsychologicaltests.PsychologicalBulletin,52,281-302..Futherreading:20Schwab,D.P.(1980)ConstructvalidityinOrganizationalBehaviour,ResearchinOrganizations,2:3-43.Campbell,D.T.&Fiske,D.W.(1959)Converentanddiscriminantvalidationbythemultitrait-multimethodindex.PsychologicalBulletin,56,81-105.Campbell,,D.T.(1957)FactorsRelevanttotheValidityofExperimentsinSocialSettings,,PsychologicalBulletin,54:297-312.Bracht,G.H.andGlass,G.U.(1968)TheExternalValidityofExperiments,AmericanEducationalResearchJournal,5:537-74.Schwab,D.P.(1980)Construct21Knapp,W.S.(1981)Onthevalidityofaccountsabouteverydaylife,SociologicalReview,29(3):543-526.Cicourel,A.V.(1982)Interviews,Surveys,andtheProblemofEcologicalValidity,AmericanSociologist,17:11-20.Lecompte,M.andGoetz,J.(1982)“ProblemsofreliabilityandValidityinEthnographicResearch”,ReviewofEducationalResearch52(1):31-60.Morse,J.M.(1994)Emergingfromthedata:thecognitiveprocessofanalysisinqualitativeenquiry,inJ.M.MorseCriticalIssuesinQualitativeResearchMethods,London:Sage.researchmethodinqualitiveresearch管理学定性研究方法22Seale,C.(1999)QualityinQualitativeResearch,QualitativeInquiry,5(4):465-478.Kinchloe,J.L.andMcLaren,P.L.(1998)“Rethinkingcriticaltheoryandqualitativeresearch”inDenzin,N.andLincoln,Y.(eds)HandbookofQualitativeResearch,London:SageTsoukas,H.(1989)TheValidityofIdiographicResearchExplanations,AcademyofManagementReview,14(4):551-561.Mabry,L.(2002)PostmodernEvaluation-ornot?AmericanJournalofEvaluation,23(2):141-57.Schwandt,T.A.(1996)“FarewelltoCriteriology”,QualitativeInquiry2(1):58-72.Seale,C.(1999)QualityinQu23Locke,K.andGolden-Biddle,K.(1997)ConstructingOpportunitiesforContribution:StructuringIntertextualCoherenceand“Problematizing”inOrganizationStudies,AcademyofManagementJournal,40(5):1023-1062.Bedeian,A.G.(2004)PeerReviewandtheSocialCobstructionofKnowledgeintheManagementDiscipline,AcademyofManagementLearningandEducation,3(2):198-216.Locke,K.andGolden-Biddle,K24researchmethodinqualitiveresearch管理学定性研究方法25EvaluatingQualitativeManagementResearch:aContingentCriteriology.WorkshopNumber7ESRCWorkshopsforQualitativeResearchinManagementEvaluatingQualitativeManagem26IdentificationoftrainingneedInappropriateassessmentcriteriaisfrequentlyappliedtoqualitativeresearch.Concernsexistabouthowtoassessqualitativeresearch

Identificationoftrainingnee27Aims

Toillustratehowcompetingphilosophicalperspectivesunderpindifferentwaysofevaluatingmanagementresearchanddifferentresearchagendas;Toillustratethedangersofusingparticularevaluationcriteria,constitutedbyparticularphilosophicalconventions,toassessallmanagementresearch;Todevelopacontingentcriteriologywhereappropriateevaluationcriteriamightbeusedwhichvaryaccordingtothephilosophicalassumptionsinformingtheresearch.Aims

Toillustratehowcompeti28ObjectivesBytheendofthesessionyoushouldbeableto:Outlinetheproblemsassociatedwithcriteriologywithregardtocompetingprocessesofresearchevaluation;Explaintheconstitutiveandcontingentrelationshipbetweenphilosophicalassumptionsandthedevelopmentofdifferentevaluationcriteria;

Describethekeyevaluationcriteriarelevanttofourdifferentapproachestomanagementresearch.ObjectivesBytheendofthese29Historicaldominanceofquantitativemethodologyinanglophonecountries;Neverthelessqualitativemanagementresearchhasalongestablishedpedigree;Qualitativeresearchmanagementresearchcharacterizedby: substantivediversity; competingphilosophicalassumptions.Confusionariseswhenevaluationcriteriaconstitutedbyparticularphilosophicalconventionsareuniversallyappliedtothisheterogeneousfield;

Toavoidmisappropriationthereisaneedforacontingentcriteriology. Historicaldominanceofquanti30FourKeyApproachestoManagementResearch:

KnowledgeconstitutingassumptionsFourKeyApproachestoManagem31(1).Positivism

Popper’smodifiedpositivistmethodologyemphasizesobjectivityandunbiaseddatacollectioninordertotesthypothesesagainstanaccessibleindependentsocialrealityinordertoprotectagainst“fancifultheorizinginmanagementresearch”(Donaldson,1996:164).Hence4keyevaluationcriteria:Internalvalidity-whetherwhatareinterpretedasthe“causes”producethe“effects”inagivenpieceofresearch-necessitatescreating,orsimulating,conditionsofclosurewhichallowempiricaltesting;Constitutingevaluationcriteriainmanagementresearch(1).PositivismConstitutingev32Testinghypothesesrequirestheoperationalizationofabstractconceptscausallyrelatedbythetheoryintoindicatorsthatmeasurewhattheyaresupposedtomeasure-constructvalidity.Akeyconcernisexternalpopulationvalidity-generalizingfindingstoadefinedpopulationbeyondthoserespondentsparticipatingintheresearch.Needtopreservedistancebetweentheresearcherandtheresearched-reliabilityoffindingsthroughreplication-thisreferstotheconsistencyofresearchfindingsandreferstotheextenttowhichitispossibleforanotherresearcherto(i)replicatetheresearchdesignwithequivalentpopulations;(ii)findthesameresults.Testinghypothesesrequiresth33Task:Evaluatethedifferentresearchmethodsintermsoftheirrelativestrengthsinregardtothe4criteriabelow:Task:Evaluatethedifferentr34EcologicalValidity

“Doourinstrumentscapturethedailylifeconditions,opinions,values,attitudes,andknowledgebaseofthosewestudyasexpressedintheirnaturalhabitat?”(Cicourel,1982:15)Raisesquestionsaround:theextenttowhichthesocialsettinginwhichdatahasbeencollectedistypicalofinformants’normal“everyday”lives?areresearchfindingsartefactsofthesocialscientist’smethodsofdatacollectionandanalyticaltools?EcologicalValidity35(2)Neo-EmpiricismThroughverstehen,andthecollectionofqualitativedata,aimstoinductivelydevelopthickdescriptionsofthepatternsactorsusetomakesenseoftheirworlds-sometimestoalsogenerategroundedtheory.Butretainspositivistcommitmenttoobjectivityexpressednowasasubject-subjectdualism:“thethird-personpointofview”(Schwandt,1996:62).Thequestionisarethephilosophicaldifferenceswithpositivismseenassignificantwhenitcomestoevaluationsresearch? -ForLecompteandGoetz(1982)no-hencecanuseunreconstructedpositivistcriteria.VS -ForLincolnandGuba(1985)yes-henceemphasizethefollowing.....(2)Neo-Empiricism36Internalvaliditywithcredibility(authenticrepresentations);Externalvaliditywithtransferability(extentofapplicability);Reliabilitywithdependability(minimizationofresearcheridiosyncrasies);Objectivitywithconfirmability

(researcherself-criticism).MeanwhileMorse(1994)focusesupontheanalysisofqualitativedata....Comprehension(learningaboutasetting);Synthesizing(identifyingpatternsinthedata);Theorizing(explanationsthatfitthedata);Recontextualizing(abstractingemergenttheorytonewsettingandrelatingittoestablishedknowledge).researchmethodinqualitiveresearch管理学定性研究方法37Hammersley(1989;1990;1992)addstothesecriteriabydevelopinginternalreflexivity-

Researcher'scriticalscrutinizationoftheimpactoftheirfieldrole(s)uponresearchsettingsandfindingssoastoreducesourcesofcontaminationtherebyenhancingecologicalvalidity(i.e.naturalism).e.g.. -avoidoverrapportwithmembers; -treatsettingasanthropologicallystrange; -retainbalancebetweeninsiderandoutsider; -retainsocialandintellectualdistancetopreserveanalyticalspace.AsSeale(1999:161)-throughrevealingaspectsofthemselvesandtheresearchprocessasatraceableaudittrail,thequalitativeresearcherpersuadesreadersthatthey“canrelyonthewriter’shardwonobjectivity”therebyestablishingthecredibility,dependabilityandconfirmabilityoffindings.Butacontradictionwithinneo-empiricistinterpretivestanceandtheir“immaculateperception”-repudiationleadstosocialconstructionistapproaches.

Hammersley(1989;1990;1992)38(3).CriticalTheoryRejectionoftheoryneutralobservationallanguage;Kantianphilosophicallegacy;Democracyandreflexivityasepistemicstandards-keytoenablingthisisthedevelopmentofacriticalconsciousnesswhere... “...firsttounderstandtheideologicallydistortedsubjectivesituationofsomeindividualorgroup,secondtoexploretheforcesthathavecausedthatsituation,andthirdtoshowthattheseforcescanbeovercomethroughawarenessofthemonthepartoftheoppressedindividualorgroupinquestion”(Dryzek,1995:99).Epistemologicallylegitimateknowledgeariseswhereitistheoutcomeofempowereddemocraticcollectivedialogue.Thisleadstofivekeyevaluationcriteria....(3).CriticalTheory39e.g.KincheloeandMcLaren(1998)Reflexiveinterrogationbytheresearcheroftheepistemologicalbaggagetheybringwiththem;Throughacriticalethnographyresearchersattempttosensitizethemselvesandparticipantstohowhegemonicregimesoftruthimpactuponthesubjectivitiesofthedisadvantaged;Positivistconceptionofvalidityrejectedinfavourofthecredibilityofsociallyconstructedrealitiestothosewhohavedemocraticallyparticipatedintheirdevelopment;Generalizabilityrejectedinfavourofaccommodation-whereresearchers’usetheirknowledgeofarangeofcomparablecontextstoassesssimilaritiesanddifferences;Catalyticvalidity-extenttowhichresearchchangesthoseitstudiessothattheyunderstandtheworldinnewwaysandusethisknowledgetochangeit-linktopragmatistcriterionofpracticaladequacy.e.g.KincheloeandMcLaren(1940(4).PostmodernismEvaluationacontroversialissuehere-oftenwrittenoffasamodernistanachronism.Postmodernistseclecticaboutwhattheywantwhilstbeingrelativelyclearaboutwhattheyareagainst-e.g.criticaltheory’sessentialism.Neverthelessanythingdoesnotgo!andwecaninferfromsubjectivistepistemologicalandontologicalstancethefollowing...Arelativistposition-nogoodreasonsforpreferringonerepresentationoverothers...Hencemissionistoundermineanyclaimtoepistemologicalauthority,subvertconventionalwaysofthinkingand...Encouragepluralityandindeterminacy-anormativeagendabydefault..(4).Postmodernism41Resultsinseveralpossibleevaluationcriteria:Displayandunsettlethediscursiverulesofthegamethroughdeconstructiontorevealthosemeaningswhichhavebeensuppressed,sublimatedorforgottenandtherebydevelop;Atmostdeconstructioncanonlyevokealternativesocialconstructionsofrealitywithinatextwhichcanthemselvesbedeconstructed-hyper-reflexivity;Paralogy-needtodestabilizetheirownnarrativestoavoidtheacontrivedinvisibilityaroundtheauthorialpresencebehindthetextthatprivilegesthetextandencouragesdiscursiveclosure-decentringtheauthor;Theresult-apreference-lesstolerationofthepolyphonicorheteroglossia-wheremulti-vocalauthorsareempoweredtomanipulatesignifierstocreatenewtextualdomainsofintelligibilitywhicharethendestabilizedadinfinitum.Resultsinseveralpossibleev42researchmethodinqualitiveresearch管理学定性研究方法43Managementresearchembracesadiversearrayofpracticesdrivenbyvaryingknowledgeconstitutingassumptions;Thislegitimizesdistinctiveperspectives,researchagendasandpromulgatesparticularevaluationcriteria;Thereforetryingtoarticulateanallembracing,indisputable,setofregulativestandardstopolicemanagementresearchisbothaforlornhopeandanunfairpractice;Hencetheneedforacontingentcriteriologythatsensitizesmanagementresearcherstotheparticularqualityissuesthattheirownandothers’researchshouldaddress.Butthereareinstitutionalbarrierstoacontingentcriteriology-henceneedtobeconcernedabouthowandwhyinparticularsocialcontextscertainresearchpracticesaredeemedvaluablewhileothersarediscountedasvaluelessaberrations.ConclusionsManagementresearchembracesa44Futherreading:Bochner,A.P.(2000)CriteriaAgainstOurselves,QualitativeInquiry,6(2):266-272.Mitchell,T.R.(1985)AnEvaluationoftheValidit