scholarly journals The use of the Delphi survey as a research tool in understanding church trends

2013 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert L. Elkington ◽  
George Lotter
Keyword(s):  
Delphi Method ◽  
Practical Theology ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Research Tool ◽  
Delphi Survey ◽  
Current Usage ◽  
Practical Theological ◽  
Research Endeavour

In the practical theological research process, as in most disciplines, extant literature is vital in assisting a researcher to formulate a foundational understanding of the topic under review. A literature review is also valuable in understanding the meta-theoretical aspects of the research topic. What does a researcher do, though, if there is little current literature on the topic under scrutiny? If there is a small corpus of literature around a subject, the Delphi method can serve as an extremely helpful research tool. This article discussed the use of the Delphi survey in a practical theological research endeavour and surveyed its history from inception to current usage. The article also reviewed the various types of Delphi survey and supported the use of the Lockean Delphi survey in this particular example of practical theological research. The article finished with an actual Delphi survey of Canadian Evangelical church pastors as an example of how the Delphi method can be used as a research tool in practical theology. The article concluded that the Delphi survey is an extremely useful research tool across the wide domain of social science research.

Context in Action and How to Study It

2019 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Care Patient ◽  
Organizational Life ◽  
Integration Of Care ◽  
Research Experiences ◽  
Organization And Management ◽  
Care Outcomes ◽  
Definition Of

The concept of context is a cornerstone of a large part of social science research, particularly in organization and management studies, yet it has received little theoretical and methodological attention in lieu of its relevance. This book offers a definition of context as a theoretical construct, a discussion of the methodological implications of this, and a framework for how to reflect upon and operationalize the role of context in the different stages of a research process, from formulating research questions to analyzing and writing about results. The chapters presented here integrate lessons derived from various research experiences across the complex and dynamic field of health care. Contributors share their experiences with theorizing about and empirically studying significant organizational phenomena such as implementation of policy, organizational change, integration of care, patient involvement, human-technology interactions in practice, and the interplay between work environment and care outcomes in eldercare. These contributions exemplify how a nuanced approach to context might unfold in different fields, through different designs, methods, and analytical lenses. Relevant to researchers and practitioners, within both healthcare, organization and management studies, and the social sciences more broadly, this book leaves the reader with a practical framework from which to carry out contextual research and analysis and a gain deeper understanding of the significance of context in organizational life.

Navigeren in het onderzoeksveld en het onderzoekersveld: reflecties op onderzoekspositionaliteit in (vermeend) insideronderzoek

KWALON ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-51
Author(s):  
Jing Hiah
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Research Field ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Insider Research ◽  
Labour Relations ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
Shed Light

Abstract Navigating the research and researchers’ field: Reflections on positionality in (assumed) insider research To challenge rigid ideas about objectivity in social science research, qualitative researchers question their own subjectivity in the research process. In such endeavors, the focus is mainly on the positionality of the researcher vis-à-vis their respondents in the research field. In this contribution, I argue that the positionality of the researcher in academia, what I refer to as the researchers’ field, is equally important as it influences the way research findings are received and evaluated. Through reflections on positionality in my insider research concerning labour relations and exploitation in Chinese migrant businesses in the Netherlands and Romania, I explore how my positionality as an insider negatively influenced my credibility and approachability in the researchers’ field. I conclude that it is necessary to pay more attention to researchers’ positionality in academia as it may shed light on and make it possible to discuss the written and unwritten standards of researchers’ credibility and approachability as an academic in the researchers’ field. Accordingly, this could provide insights into the causes of inequalities in academia and contribute to the current challenge for more diversity in academia.

scholarly journals Is Banning Significance Testing the Best Way to Improve Applied Social Science Research? – Questions on

2016 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 95-105
Author(s):  
Thees F Spreckelsen ◽  
Mariska Van Der Horst
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Significance Testing ◽  
Sociological Research ◽  
Research Practice ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Applied Social Science

Significance testing is widely used in social science research. It has long been criticised on statistical grounds and problems in the research practice. This paper is an applied researchers’ response to Gorard's (2016) ‘Damaging real lives through obstinacy: re-emphasising why significance testing is wrong’ in Sociological Research Online 21(1). He participates in this debate concluding from the issues raised that the use and teaching of significance testing should cease immediately. In that, he goes beyond a mere ban of significance testing, but claims that researchers still doing this are being unethical. We argue that his attack on applied scientists is unlikely to improve social science research and we believe he does not sufficiently prove his claims. In particular we are concerned that with a narrow focus on statistical significance, Gorard misses alternative, if not more important, explanations for the often-lamented problems in social science research. Instead, we argue that it is important to take into account the full research process, not just the step of data analysis, to get a better idea of the best evidence regarding a hypothesis.

scholarly journals Users and Social Science Research: Policy, Problems and Possibilities

1997 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 69-81 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. Rappert
Keyword(s):  
Research Policy ◽  
Social Research ◽  
Public Funding ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
User Involvement ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Research Process ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Policy Problems

Recent times have seen a significant reorientation in public funding for academic research across many countries. Public bodies in the UK have been at the forefront of such activities, typically justified in terms of a need to meet the challenges of international competitiveness and improve quality of life. One set of mechanisms advanced for further achieving these goals is the incorporation of users’ needs into various aspects of the research process. This paper examines some of the consequences of greater user involvement in the UK Economic and Social Research Council by drawing on both empirical evidence and more speculative argumentation. In doing so it poses some of the dilemmas for conceptualizing proper user involvement.

RESEARCH STRATEGIES FOR INCREASING NEW KNOWLEDGE DISCOVERY

2000 ◽  
Vol 08 (01) ◽  
pp. 47-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
GUS M GEURSEN
Keyword(s):  
Social Science Research ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Theory Development ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Knowledge Generation ◽  
Research Model ◽  
Research Strategies ◽  
New Knowledge

The purpose of this paper is to examine a traditional academic research model frequently used in scholarly papers and the implications of this model in restricting growth and quality of new knowledge generation. The paper contends a traditional academic research process (TARP) is evident in business and the other social science research. It identifies concerns about the process and how it restricts new theory development. The paper provides an alternative model, the higher academic research model (HARP) which is characterised by closer interaction between research processes and phenomena under investigation. The paper concludes by demonstrating the increased output achievement of the new model.

scholarly journals Gatekeepers in Agricultural Extension Research: A Retrospective Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 94-110
Author(s):  
Fallys Masambuka-Kanchewa ◽  
Kevan Lamm ◽  
Alexa Lamm
Keyword(s):  
Rural Communities ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Policy Formulation ◽  
Sub Saharan Africa ◽  
Research Subjects ◽  
Social Scientists

Social science research plays an important role in transforming agriculture as it provides an invaluable source of information for policy formulation and implementation. Social scientists collecting data in rural communities, where the majority of agricultural production occurs, around the globe frequently pass through a layer of gatekeepers to access research communities and subjects. Gatekeepers serve a critical role in access to subjects but their influence on the research process in many countries and contexts has not been examined thoroughly. The findings of this phenomenology study, conducted in four Sub-Saharan Africa countries, indicated gatekeepers provide invaluable access to individuals and perspectives that may otherwise be inaccessible. However, the findings indicated gatekeepers may also have a vested interests in the research being conducted. Among others, gatekeepers may introduce selection bias to the research process. Therefore, it is important for social scientists working in countries where gatekeepers are involved in the research process to understand the limitations gatekeepers introduce when conducting social science research. Having such knowledge is necessary when interpreting research results and will help researchers be cognizant of the power dynamics that may exist between gatekeepers and those they represent as well as implications on the research process. Keywords: Gatekeepers, social science research, objectivity, power structures, extension, access, research subjects

scholarly journals Reflexive Poetry

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-81
Author(s):  
Eric Van Giessen
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Academic Language ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Faith Communities ◽  
Science Writing ◽  
Data Presentation ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Sacred Stories

These four poems are excerpts from a multifaceted project entitled Queerly Faithful: A Queer-Poet Community Autoethnography on Identity and Belonging in Faith Communities. This project attempts to bolster and critique contemporary studies of queer and faith identities as they manifest in the lives of queer people of faith by approaching the subject with a queer sensibility (Holman Jones & Adams 2010: 204). One facet of this approach involved my use of poetry as a personal reflexive medium on the research process itself. The poems invite the reader into my experience as I wrestle with articulating methodology, theory framing, data presentation, and the questions and challenges of producing a fixed document to present the findings of a queer project that resists fixedness. By blurring the lines between poetry/narrative/storytelling and social science writing, I invite the readers “to become coparticipants, engaging the storyline morally, emotionally, aesthetically, and intellectually” (Ellis & Bochner 2000: 745). The poems, which are scattered throughout the research paper, nuance the traditional academic language and prose analysis in the paper and serve to challenge conceptions of ‘proper’ social science writing and position the writing itself as a method of inquiry (Prendergast, Leggo & Sameshima 2009; Richardson & St. Pierre 2005; Richardson 1993). The poems in isolation, as presented here, invite the reader to consider the strengths and challenges of social science research and articulate my struggle to honour the sacred stories of my participants through fixed language. The poems play with the questions: what does it mean to be a social justice researcher and how might our work, methodologically as well as topically, critique and undermine oppressive epistemologies that elevate and prioritize certain voices over others?

A Sociologist's Field Notes to the Mass Observation Archive: A Consideration of the Challenges of ‘re-Using’ Mass Observation Data in a Longitudinal Mixed-Methods Study

2014 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 147-160
Author(s):  
Rose Lindsey ◽  
Sarah Bulloch
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Mixed Methods Research ◽  
Research Council ◽  
Social Research ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Secondary Analysis ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Observation Data

This paper explores the challenges arising from the ‘re-use’ of Mass Observation Project (MOP) writing (1981 to present day) encountered by the authors when setting up an Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) funded, longitudinal, mixed-methods research project on civic engagement. The paper begins with a brief review of the present UK social science research environment, highlighting the evidence for an increasing Research Council focus on interdisciplinary research and secondary analysis/re-use of data. It argues that this shift in focus gives rise to unique methodological challenges such as those encountered by the authors in this project. After providing some background and context, the paper discusses different obstacles encountered in the course of setting up this project. These include difficulties in: communicating within and across disciplines; re-using data across disciplines; the use of metadata, and its role in choosing writers from a longitudinal secondary data source; choice of analytical tools and approaches; and the Mass Observation writer's role in the research process. By sharing these experiences, the paper seeks to enable potential users of the MOP to see the value of MOP as a source of longitudinal qualitative secondary data; appreciate its potential for use with other data sources and across different disciplines; and equip other researchers to meet some of the challenges that the longitudinal use of MOP writing throws up.

scholarly journals Epistemological Values and Limitations of Ethnography as an Interpretive Research Approach

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 83-90
Author(s):  
Youba Raj Luintel
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Research Design ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Research Approach ◽  
Multiple Perspectives ◽  
Interpretive Approach ◽  
Theoretical Frame ◽  
Humanities And Social Sciences

The research method in humanities and social sciences shares a certain theoretical frame and research design with the interpretive approach. The “interpretive approach” of ethnographic research brings humanities and social sciences together in the realms of naturalistic inquiry as well as knowledge production. This article discusses how ethnographers would tend to address these epistemological fronts in scholarship and research design in humanities and social sciences. It also raises some of the pragmatics and methodological utilities of the ethnographic approach, followed by a short description of ethical and practical issues involved in the research process. Both the humanities and social science research adopt the interpretive approach to explore the subject of investigation in the specific theoretical frame and from multiple perspectives. The article concludes that the strengths that it offers, particularly concerning unravelling complexities of people’s daily lives in their “meaning perspectives,” are unique and appealing even though ethnography never remains immune to some of the limitations of qualitative research.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document