scholarly journals The politicization of research methods, illustrated in the case of plant closures

2020 ◽  
Vol 64 (3) ◽  
pp. 109-120
Author(s):  
Sally A. Weller
Keyword(s):  
Research Methods ◽  
Economic Geography ◽  
Research Practices ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative ◽  
Policy Context ◽  
The Future ◽  
Plant Closures ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Policy Engagement ◽  
Contemporary Context

AbstractThis paper contributes to building better methods in economic geography by examining the coevolution of theory, methodology, and should read methodology, and the practice of research methods with the policy context. The paper suggests that debates about how economic geography defines its theoretical and methodological boundaries have not been sufficiently cognizant of the effects of policy engagement. It posits that the politicized contemporary context is aligning research practices to policy constituencies, reshaping research questions, altering the criteria of research validity, increasing the division between qualitative and quantitative approaches, and solidifying divisions between different sub-branches of the discipline. This process is illustrated by way of a genealogy of studies of plant closures. The conclusion links these changes to questions about the future of the discipline.

The First 20 Years of Organizational Research Methods: Trajectory, Impact, and Predictions for the Future

2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 463-489 ◽  
Author(s):  
Herman Aguinis ◽  
Ravi S. Ramani ◽  
Isabel Villamor
Keyword(s):  
Research Methods ◽  
Historical Record ◽  
Professional Organizations ◽  
Methodological Issues ◽  
Future Directions ◽  
Organizational Research ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative ◽  
The Future ◽  
Disciplinary Background ◽  
Factor Data

We analyze the trajectory of Organizational Research Methods ( ORM) during the first 20 years of its existence (i.e., 1998-2017). First, beginning with the inaugural volume, we review the editorials to create a qualitative account regarding ORM’s journey as narrated by the journal’s leaders in their own voices. Second, we examine the composition of the five senior editorial teams (i.e., editors and associate editors), including their qualitative-quantitative, micro-macro, and disciplinary orientation, as well as the types of articles published by ORM along the qualitative-quantitative and micro-macro distinctions. Third, we describe the 27 feature topics (i.e., set of articles addressing a common issue) published by ORM. Fourth, we offer information regarding ORM’s impact and influence based on impact factor data, journal lists, and other indicators (e.g., ORM articles that have received awards from professional organizations, most cited ORM articles out of a total of 484). Fifth, we identify the most frequently published ORM authors (and their disciplinary background) out of a total of 884 who have published at least one article. Finally, we discuss implications and outline opportunities and challenges as well as possible future directions for ORM. Overall, our review and analysis of the first 20 years of ORM allowed us to create a historical record for future generations, gain qualitative and quantitative insights into ORM’s trajectory and its impact and influence over time, and make predictions for the future of the journal and, more broadly, research on methodological issues.

scholarly journals Research methods in Engineering Design: A systematic literature review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Escudero Mancebo ◽  
Nieves Fernández Villalobos ◽  
Óscar Martín Llorente ◽  
Alejandra Martínez-Monés
Keyword(s):  
Engineering Design ◽  
Research Methods ◽  
Valuable Resource ◽  
Process Data ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Empirical Approaches ◽  
Phd Programs ◽  
Collection Methods ◽  
Clear Relation

The relation between scientific research and industrial design is fraught with controversy. While the number of academic PhD programs on product design grows because the discipline is in its infancy, there is no consolidated method for systematically approaching the generation of knowledge in this domain. This paper aims to review recently published papers from the four top-ranked journals in engineering design in order to analyse the research methods that are frequently used. The research questions consider the aim and contributions of the papers, as well as which experimental design and which sources of data are being used. Frequency tables show the high variety of approaches and aims of the papers, combining both qualitative and quantitative empirical approaches and analytical methods. Most of the papers focus on methodological concerns or on delving into a particular aspect of the design process. Data collection methods are also diverse without a clear relation between the type of method and the objective or strategy of the research. This paper aims to act as a valuable resource for academics, providing definitions related to research methods and referencing examples, and for researchers, shedding light on some of the weaknesses and challenges for current research in the domain of engineering design.

scholarly journals From the Editor

Projections ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. v-vi
Author(s):  
Ted Nannicelli
Keyword(s):  
Research Methods ◽  
Cognitive Neuroscience ◽  
Film Music ◽  
Third Culture ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative ◽  
Feature Films ◽  
Machine Learning Model ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Method Approach

This issue of Projections features an impressive diversity of research questions and research methods. In our first article, Timothy Justus investigates the question of how film music represents meaning from three distinct methodological perspectives—music theory, cognitive psychology, and cognitive neuroscience. Following a model of naturalized aesthetics proposed by Murray Smith in Film, Art, and the Third Culture (see the book symposium in Projections 12.2), Justus argues for the importance of “triangulating” the methods and approaches of each field—more generally, of the humanities, the behavioral sciences, and the natural sciences. Our second article, by Gal Raz, Giancarlo Valente, Michele Svanera, Sergio Benini, and András Bálint Kovács, also explores the effects fostered by a specific formal device of cinema—in this case, shot-scale. And again, distinct research methods are put to complementary use. Raz and colleagues’ starting point is a desire to empirically test a hypothesis advanced by art historians Alois Riegl and Heinrich Wölfflin. To do this, they apply a machine-learning model to neurological data supplied by a set of fMRI scans. Methodology is the explicit topic of our third article, by Jose Cañas-Bajo, Teresa Cañas-Bajo, Juri-Petri Valtanen, and Pertti Saariluoma, who outline a new mixed (qualitative and quantitative) method approach to the study of how feature films elicit viewer interest.

A Meta-Analysis of Interviews and Cognitive Ability

2013 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 157-169 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip L. Roth ◽  
Allen I. Huffcutt
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Ability ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Incremental Validity ◽  
Employment Interviews ◽  
Moderator Analysis ◽  
The Future ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
The Relationship

The topic of what interviews measure has received a great deal of attention over the years. One line of research has investigated the relationship between interviews and the construct of cognitive ability. A previous meta-analysis reported an overall corrected correlation of .40 ( Huffcutt, Roth, & McDaniel, 1996 ). A more recent meta-analysis reported a noticeably lower corrected correlation of .27 ( Berry, Sackett, & Landers, 2007 ). After reviewing both meta-analyses, it appears that the two studies posed different research questions. Further, there were a number of coding judgments in Berry et al. that merit review, and there was no moderator analysis for educational versus employment interviews. As a result, we reanalyzed the work by Berry et al. and found a corrected correlation of .42 for employment interviews (.15 higher than Berry et al., a 56% increase). Further, educational interviews were associated with a corrected correlation of .21, supporting their influence as a moderator. We suggest a better estimate of the correlation between employment interviews and cognitive ability is .42, and this takes us “back to the future” in that the better overall estimate of the employment interviews – cognitive ability relationship is roughly .40. This difference has implications for what is being measured by interviews and their incremental validity.

A Brief Statement on the Future of Public Scholarship and the Research Methods Landscape

2019 ◽  
pp. 700-707
Author(s):  
Patricia Leavy
Keyword(s):  
Research Methods ◽  
Teaching Practices ◽  
Knowledge Building ◽  
Research Community ◽  
The State ◽  
Public Scholarship ◽  
Institutional Structures ◽  
The Future ◽  
Book Editor

The book editor offers some final comments about the state of the field and promise for the future. Leavy suggests researchers consider using the language of “shapes” to talk about the forms their research takes and to highlight the ongoing role of the research community in shaping knowledge-building practices. She reviews the challenges and rewards of taking your work public. Leavy concludes by noting that institutional structures need to evolve their rewards criteria in order to meet the demands of practicing contemporary research and suggests that professors update their teaching practices to bring the audiences of research into the forefront of discussions of methodology.

Open Science, Closed Doors? Countering Marginalization through an Agenda for Ethical, Inclusive Research in Communication

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jesse Fox ◽  
Katy E Pearce ◽  
Adrienne L Massanari ◽  
Julius Matthew Riles ◽  
Łukasz Szulc ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Open Science ◽  
Research Community ◽  
Ethical Principles ◽  
Respect For Persons ◽  
Communication Research ◽  
Research Practices ◽  
Science Practices ◽  
Research Communication ◽  
The Future

Abstract The open science (OS) movement has advocated for increased transparency in certain aspects of research. Communication is taking its first steps toward OS as some journals have adopted OS guidelines codified by another discipline. We find this pursuit troubling as OS prioritizes openness while insufficiently addressing essential ethical principles: respect for persons, beneficence, and justice. Some recommended open science practices increase the potential for harm for marginalized participants, communities, and researchers. We elaborate how OS can serve a marginalizing force within academia and the research community, as it overlooks the needs of marginalized scholars and excludes some forms of scholarship. We challenge the current instantiation of OS and propose a divergent agenda for the future of Communication research centered on ethical, inclusive research practices.

Psychophysiology, cognition, and political differences

2021 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 137-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jordan Mansell ◽  
Allison Harell ◽  
Elisabeth Gidengil ◽  
Patrick A. Stewart
Keyword(s):  
Political Science ◽  
Life Sciences ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Common Theme ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
The Future ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Political Differences ◽  
Science Framework

AbstractWe introduce the Politics and the Life Sciences special issue on Psychophysiology, Cognition, and Political Differences. This issue represents the second special issue funded by the Association for Politics and the Life Sciences that adheres to the Open Science Framework for registered reports (RR). Here pre-analysis plans (PAPs) are peer-reviewed and given in-principle acceptance (IPA) prior to data being collected and/or analyzed, and are published contingent upon the preregistration of the study being followed as proposed. Bound by a common theme of the importance of incorporating psychophysiological perspectives into the study of politics, broadly defined, the articles in this special issue feature a unique set of research questions and methodologies. In the following, we summarize the findings, discuss the innovations produced by this research, and highlight the importance of open science for the future of political science research.

Introduction

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caroline Gatrell ◽  
Esther Dermott
Keyword(s):  
Social Research ◽  
Visual Methods ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative ◽  
The Social ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Research Relationships ◽  
The Impact

This introductory chapter explains how different research questions and methods can contribute to better understanding of contemporary fathers, fatherhood, and fathering. Given the enhanced methodological diversity and increased sophistication of methods across the social sciences, embracing qualitative and quantitative approaches, traditional (such as interviewing) and contemporary approaches (such as netnography and visual methods), and general ‘handbooks’ offering basic introductions to social research have limited use for advanced researchers and students. The book aims to link detailed concerns about conducting individual projects to wider methodological debates concerning the value of different forms and sources of data, the negotiation of research relationships, and the impact of research findings on participants, policy makers, employers, and a wider public.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document