期刊文献+

白话《社会科学中的研究设计》:日常思考的语言与研究设计的逻辑 被引量:4

Research Design in Plain English: How to Address Designing Social Inquiry to Non-Quantitative Researchers
下载PDF
导出
摘要 论及社会科学研究方法,《社会科学中的研究设计》是不容略过的经典。它从定量社科研究中,提炼研究设计的通则,无论定量、定性学者均能从中获益。但在表述与解说原则时,作者虽力求深入浅出,但仍偏数理语言,往往产生"定量研究不必读,定性研究不能读"的窘境。有鉴于此,文章运用日常语言,条理并阐述《设计》所提炼的原则,一方面让不习惯数理语言的研究者,也能掌握运用该书建议,另方面也盼藉此说明,研究设计的原理,也能运用日常语言加以理解与传述。 When talking about research design, Designing Social Inquiry is widely accepted as a must- read in the field. The book draws mainly from quantitative social research but offers a couple of general rules for the design of social research,and both qualitativists and quantitativists could benefit from its teachings. However,while the authors try to make straight forward arguments, the language used to articulate and illustrate these rules is essentially mathematic. As a result,the work tends to be too familiar to quantitativists but too difficult for qualitativists. This paper reinterprets therules of research design characterized in the book by using the everyday language of non- quantitativists. The purpose is two- fold: one is to help qualitativists to learn from this classic work and the other is to show that the rules of research design can be addressed and understood in everyday language.
出处 《公共行政评论》 CSSCI 北大核心 2015年第4期17-30,182-183,共14页 Journal of Public Administration
基金 上海财经大学研究生科研创新基金(CXJJ-2012-329)
关键词 研究设计 因果关系 案例选取 日常语言 数理语言 Research Design Causal Relations Case Selection Everyday Language Mathematical Language
  • 相关文献

参考文献20

  • 1高奇琦编(2 0 1 5 ) . 比较政治学的质性与量化之争.北京:中央编译出版社.
  • 2耿曙,陈玮.比较政治的案例研究:反思几项方法论上的迷思[J].社会科学,2013(5):20-29. 被引量:18
  • 3芭芭拉- 格迪斯(2 0 1 2 ) . 范式与沙堡:比较政治中的理论构建和研究设计. 陈子恪,刘骥等译. 重庆:重庆大学出版社.
  • 4加里. 金,罗伯特. 基欧汉,悉尼. 维巴(2 0 1 4 ) . 社会科学中的研究设计. 陈硕译. 上海:格致出版社/ 上海人民出版社.
  • 5杰弗里- M. 伍德里奇(2 0 1 0 ) . 计量经济学导论. 费剑平译. 北京:中国人民大学出版社.
  • 6[9]麦克洛斯基等著,许宝强等译.社会科学的措辞[M].北京:三联书店,1997.
  • 7Boulding, K. E. ( 1948). Samuelson’s Foundations : The Role of Mathematics in Economics. Journalof Political Economy, 56 (3 ) : 187 - 199.
  • 8Brandy, H. E. & Collier, D. Eds. (2010). Rethinking Social Inquiry : Diverse Tools, SharedStandards. Lanham, MD : Rowman and Littlefield.
  • 9Caporaso, J. A. ( 1995). Research Design, Falsification, and the Qualitative - Quantitative DivideDesigning Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research by Gary King; Robert O.Keohane; Sidney Verba. American Political Science Review, 89 (2 ) : 457 -460.
  • 10Collier, D. ( 1995 ). Translating Quantitative Methods for Qualitative Researchers : The Case ofSelection Bias Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research by Gary King;Robert O. Keohane; Sidney Verba. American Political Science Review, 89 (2) : 461 -466.

二级参考文献27

同被引文献77

引证文献4

二级引证文献23

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部