Methodological Socialization and Identity: A Bricolage Study of Pathways Toward Qualitative Research in Doctoral Education

IF 8.9 2区 管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT
Sebnem Cilesiz, Thomas Greckhamer
{"title":"Methodological Socialization and Identity: A Bricolage Study of Pathways Toward Qualitative Research in Doctoral Education","authors":"Sebnem Cilesiz, Thomas Greckhamer","doi":"10.1177/1094428120980047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Trends toward convergence on common methodologies and standardized templates restrict the diversity of qualitative methods in organizational research. Considering that graduate education is a critical process in the socialization of researchers into the norms and dominant practices of their discipline, graduate students’ socialization into research methodologies is vital for understanding methodological convergence. The purpose of our study was to understand how graduate students’ socialization shapes their methodological and paradigmatic preferences. Showcasing methodological bricolage as an alternative to qualitative templates, we constructed a research design that combined thematic, discourse, and narrative analyses to investigate graduate students’ reflections throughout a qualitative methods course introducing alternative research paradigms. Our findings highlight the role of institutional, disciplinary, and personal influences as well as identity work in researchers’ socialization and trace alternative trajectories by which socialization and methodological identity construction processes may unfold. We offer a sketch of methodological socialization and suggest that its understanding should be central to nurturing paradigmatic and methodological plurality in qualitative research. We conclude with implications for future research and for research methods training.","PeriodicalId":19689,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Research Methods","volume":"25 1","pages":"337 - 370"},"PeriodicalIF":8.9000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1094428120980047","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Organizational Research Methods","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428120980047","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

Trends toward convergence on common methodologies and standardized templates restrict the diversity of qualitative methods in organizational research. Considering that graduate education is a critical process in the socialization of researchers into the norms and dominant practices of their discipline, graduate students’ socialization into research methodologies is vital for understanding methodological convergence. The purpose of our study was to understand how graduate students’ socialization shapes their methodological and paradigmatic preferences. Showcasing methodological bricolage as an alternative to qualitative templates, we constructed a research design that combined thematic, discourse, and narrative analyses to investigate graduate students’ reflections throughout a qualitative methods course introducing alternative research paradigms. Our findings highlight the role of institutional, disciplinary, and personal influences as well as identity work in researchers’ socialization and trace alternative trajectories by which socialization and methodological identity construction processes may unfold. We offer a sketch of methodological socialization and suggest that its understanding should be central to nurturing paradigmatic and methodological plurality in qualitative research. We conclude with implications for future research and for research methods training.
方法论的社会化与认同:博士教育质性研究路径的拼凑研究
通用方法和标准化模板趋同的趋势限制了组织研究中定性方法的多样性。考虑到研究生教育是研究人员融入学科规范和主导实践的关键过程,研究生融入研究方法论对于理解方法论趋同至关重要。我们研究的目的是了解研究生的社会化如何塑造他们的方法论和范式偏好。展示了方法论拼凑作为定性模板的替代方案,我们构建了一个研究设计,结合主题、话语和叙事分析,在引入替代研究范式的定性方法课程中调查研究生的反思。我们的研究结果强调了制度、学科和个人影响以及身份工作在研究人员社会化中的作用,并追踪了社会化和方法论身份构建过程可能展开的替代轨迹。我们提供了一个方法论社会化的草图,并建议对其的理解应该是在定性研究中培养范式和方法论多样性的核心。最后,我们对未来的研究和研究方法培训提出了建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
23.20
自引率
3.20%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: Organizational Research Methods (ORM) was founded with the aim of introducing pertinent methodological advancements to researchers in organizational sciences. The objective of ORM is to promote the application of current and emerging methodologies to advance both theory and research practices. Articles are expected to be comprehensible to readers with a background consistent with the methodological and statistical training provided in contemporary organizational sciences doctoral programs. The text should be presented in a manner that facilitates accessibility. For instance, highly technical content should be placed in appendices, and authors are encouraged to include example data and computer code when relevant. Additionally, authors should explicitly outline how their contribution has the potential to advance organizational theory and research practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信