从定性访谈中提出知识主张:认识论模式的类型学

IF 4.5 2区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS
Andrea Whittle, Stefanie Reissner
{"title":"从定性访谈中提出知识主张:认识论模式的类型学","authors":"Andrea Whittle,&nbsp;Stefanie Reissner","doi":"10.1111/1467-8551.12845","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Qualitative interviewing is the most common qualitative research method in management studies. However, researchers using this method tend to use a distinct ‘packages’ of practices, each of which is underpinned by a distinct onto-epistemological paradigm. In this paper, we contribute to the understanding of how paradigms influence research by examining how researchers make an ‘epistemological leap’ from their interview data to a claim to know something about a phenomenon outside of the interview situation. Using illustrative examples from published management research, we develop a typology of five epistemological modes that differ according to <i>how far</i> researchers ‘leap’ and <i>what</i> they ‘leap’ to when making knowledge claims from interview data. We conclude by outlining the implications of our typology for those involved in conducting, teaching and evaluating qualitative interview research.</p>","PeriodicalId":48342,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Management","volume":"36 1","pages":"3-16"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1467-8551.12845","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Making Knowledge Claims from Qualitative Interviews: A Typology of Epistemological Modes\",\"authors\":\"Andrea Whittle,&nbsp;Stefanie Reissner\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1467-8551.12845\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Qualitative interviewing is the most common qualitative research method in management studies. However, researchers using this method tend to use a distinct ‘packages’ of practices, each of which is underpinned by a distinct onto-epistemological paradigm. In this paper, we contribute to the understanding of how paradigms influence research by examining how researchers make an ‘epistemological leap’ from their interview data to a claim to know something about a phenomenon outside of the interview situation. Using illustrative examples from published management research, we develop a typology of five epistemological modes that differ according to <i>how far</i> researchers ‘leap’ and <i>what</i> they ‘leap’ to when making knowledge claims from interview data. We conclude by outlining the implications of our typology for those involved in conducting, teaching and evaluating qualitative interview research.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48342,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of Management\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"3-16\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1467-8551.12845\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8551.12845\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8551.12845","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

定性访谈是管理学中最常用的定性研究方法。然而,使用这种方法的研究人员倾向于使用一个独特的实践“包”,每个实践都以一个独特的本体-认识论范式为基础。在本文中,我们通过研究研究人员如何从他们的访谈数据中做出“认识论飞跃”,以声称对访谈情境之外的现象有所了解,从而有助于理解范式如何影响研究。利用已发表的管理研究中的说明性例子,我们开发了五种认识论模式的类型学,这些模式根据研究人员在从访谈数据中做出知识主张时的“飞跃”程度和“飞跃”程度而不同。最后,我们概述了我们的类型学对那些参与进行、教学和评估定性访谈研究的人的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Making Knowledge Claims from Qualitative Interviews: A Typology of Epistemological Modes

Making Knowledge Claims from Qualitative Interviews: A Typology of Epistemological Modes

Qualitative interviewing is the most common qualitative research method in management studies. However, researchers using this method tend to use a distinct ‘packages’ of practices, each of which is underpinned by a distinct onto-epistemological paradigm. In this paper, we contribute to the understanding of how paradigms influence research by examining how researchers make an ‘epistemological leap’ from their interview data to a claim to know something about a phenomenon outside of the interview situation. Using illustrative examples from published management research, we develop a typology of five epistemological modes that differ according to how far researchers ‘leap’ and what they ‘leap’ to when making knowledge claims from interview data. We conclude by outlining the implications of our typology for those involved in conducting, teaching and evaluating qualitative interview research.

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
CiteScore
10.00
自引率
12.50%
发文量
87
期刊介绍: The British Journal of Management provides a valuable outlet for research and scholarship on management-orientated themes and topics. It publishes articles of a multi-disciplinary and interdisciplinary nature as well as empirical research from within traditional disciplines and managerial functions. With contributions from around the globe, the journal includes articles across the full range of business and management disciplines. A subscription to British Journal of Management includes International Journal of Management Reviews, also published on behalf of the British Academy of Management.
×
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