多方法研究是否比单一方法研究更有说服力?1980-2018年国际关系期刊文章分析

IF 2.2 2区社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

Security Studies Pub Date : 2023-11-08 DOI:10.1080/09636412.2023.2262388

Anton Peez

{"title":"多方法研究是否比单一方法研究更有说服力?1980-2018年国际关系期刊文章分析","authors":"Anton Peez","doi":"10.1080/09636412.2023.2262388","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While some social scientists see multi-method research (MMR) as a promising strategy for strong causal inference, others argue that it does little to strengthen the validity of research. This paper offers a systematic review of how MMR has been used in mainstream International Relations (IR) and specifically in security studies. Using the TRIP Journal Article Database and Web of Science citation data, I examine whether MMR has reached its full potential. MMR has grown in prominence since the 2000s. Scholars use it most often to examine domestic rather than interstate issues. They cite MMR articles less than they cite quantitative single-method articles and about as often as they cite qualitative single-method research. This suggests that MMR is not more influential, nor perceived as more persuasive. However, this gap has decreased in recent years. The study provides insights into IR at the research design and disciplinary levels, the utility of MMR, and knowledge accumulation in social science.","PeriodicalId":47478,"journal":{"name":"Security Studies","volume":"133 11‐12","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is multi-method research more convincing than single-method research? An analysis of International Relations journal articles, 1980–2018\",\"authors\":\"Anton Peez\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09636412.2023.2262388\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"While some social scientists see multi-method research (MMR) as a promising strategy for strong causal inference, others argue that it does little to strengthen the validity of research. This paper offers a systematic review of how MMR has been used in mainstream International Relations (IR) and specifically in security studies. Using the TRIP Journal Article Database and Web of Science citation data, I examine whether MMR has reached its full potential. MMR has grown in prominence since the 2000s. Scholars use it most often to examine domestic rather than interstate issues. They cite MMR articles less than they cite quantitative single-method articles and about as often as they cite qualitative single-method research. This suggests that MMR is not more influential, nor perceived as more persuasive. However, this gap has decreased in recent years. The study provides insights into IR at the research design and disciplinary levels, the utility of MMR, and knowledge accumulation in social science.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47478,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Security Studies\",\"volume\":\"133 11‐12\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Security Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/09636412.2023.2262388\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Security Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09636412.2023.2262388","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

虽然一些社会科学家认为多方法研究(MMR)是一种强有力的因果推理的有前途的策略，但其他人认为它对加强研究的有效性几乎没有帮助。本文系统地回顾了MMR在主流国际关系(IR)尤其是安全研究中的应用。利用TRIP期刊文章数据库和Web of Science引文数据，我研究了MMR是否已经充分发挥了它的潜力。自2000年代以来，MMR越来越受重视。学者们通常用它来研究国内问题，而不是州际问题。他们引用MMR文章的次数少于引用定量单方法文章的次数，而引用定性单方法研究的次数也差不多。这表明MMR并没有更有影响力，也没有被认为更有说服力。然而，这一差距近年来有所缩小。该研究从研究设计和学科水平、MMR的效用和社会科学的知识积累方面提供了对IR的见解。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Is multi-method research more convincing than single-method research? An analysis of International Relations journal articles, 1980–2018

While some social scientists see multi-method research (MMR) as a promising strategy for strong causal inference, others argue that it does little to strengthen the validity of research. This paper offers a systematic review of how MMR has been used in mainstream International Relations (IR) and specifically in security studies. Using the TRIP Journal Article Database and Web of Science citation data, I examine whether MMR has reached its full potential. MMR has grown in prominence since the 2000s. Scholars use it most often to examine domestic rather than interstate issues. They cite MMR articles less than they cite quantitative single-method articles and about as often as they cite qualitative single-method research. This suggests that MMR is not more influential, nor perceived as more persuasive. However, this gap has decreased in recent years. The study provides insights into IR at the research design and disciplinary levels, the utility of MMR, and knowledge accumulation in social science.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Security Studies INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-

CiteScore

2.70

自引率

16.70%

发文量

期刊介绍： Security Studies publishes innovative scholarly manuscripts that make a significant contribution – whether theoretical, empirical, or both – to our understanding of international security. Studies that do not emphasize the causes and consequences of war or the sources and conditions of peace fall outside the journal’s domain. Security Studies features articles that develop, test, and debate theories of international security – that is, articles that address an important research question, display innovation in research, contribute in a novel way to a body of knowledge, and (as appropriate) demonstrate theoretical development with state-of-the art use of appropriate methodological tools. While we encourage authors to discuss the policy implications of their work, articles that are primarily policy-oriented do not fit the journal’s mission. The journal publishes articles that challenge the conventional wisdom in the area of international security studies. Security Studies includes a wide range of topics ranging from nuclear proliferation and deterrence, civil-military relations, strategic culture, ethnic conflicts and their resolution, epidemics and national security, democracy and foreign-policy decision making, developments in qualitative and multi-method research, and the future of security studies.