{"title":"比较的理论抽样","authors":"A. Adebayo, B. Ackers","doi":"10.34190/EJBRM.19.1.2434","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Sampling has historically been one of the major challenges of the comparative research approach. These sampling challenges primarily result from the way researchers select the cases/samples for the study. In this regard, researchers have to a large extent tended to employ non-probability convenience and purposive sampling techniques. Even though it may be argued that these sampling approaches need not be theory driven as samples tend to evolve in the process of research, more often than not, these sampling methods, especially in comparative research designs, while skewing research attention towards over-researched countries and cases, wealthy nations and incomparable cases, also introduce an element of bias into sampling and therefore into research findings. Thus, this paper argues for a move away from the simplicity of purposive and convenience sampling, to one of the more robust forms of theoretical sampling, in order to improve the research rigour associated with the comparative methodological approach. This paper accordingly postulates this may be achieved by engaging in some form of theoretical sampling. In this regard, this paper describes a two-phase method for generating comparative samples from theories, involving six distinct steps.","PeriodicalId":38532,"journal":{"name":"Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sampling Theoretically for Comparison\",\"authors\":\"A. Adebayo, B. Ackers\",\"doi\":\"10.34190/EJBRM.19.1.2434\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Sampling has historically been one of the major challenges of the comparative research approach. These sampling challenges primarily result from the way researchers select the cases/samples for the study. In this regard, researchers have to a large extent tended to employ non-probability convenience and purposive sampling techniques. Even though it may be argued that these sampling approaches need not be theory driven as samples tend to evolve in the process of research, more often than not, these sampling methods, especially in comparative research designs, while skewing research attention towards over-researched countries and cases, wealthy nations and incomparable cases, also introduce an element of bias into sampling and therefore into research findings. Thus, this paper argues for a move away from the simplicity of purposive and convenience sampling, to one of the more robust forms of theoretical sampling, in order to improve the research rigour associated with the comparative methodological approach. This paper accordingly postulates this may be achieved by engaging in some form of theoretical sampling. In this regard, this paper describes a two-phase method for generating comparative samples from theories, involving six distinct steps.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38532,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.34190/EJBRM.19.1.2434\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Business, Management and Accounting\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34190/EJBRM.19.1.2434","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Business, Management and Accounting","Score":null,"Total":0}
Sampling has historically been one of the major challenges of the comparative research approach. These sampling challenges primarily result from the way researchers select the cases/samples for the study. In this regard, researchers have to a large extent tended to employ non-probability convenience and purposive sampling techniques. Even though it may be argued that these sampling approaches need not be theory driven as samples tend to evolve in the process of research, more often than not, these sampling methods, especially in comparative research designs, while skewing research attention towards over-researched countries and cases, wealthy nations and incomparable cases, also introduce an element of bias into sampling and therefore into research findings. Thus, this paper argues for a move away from the simplicity of purposive and convenience sampling, to one of the more robust forms of theoretical sampling, in order to improve the research rigour associated with the comparative methodological approach. This paper accordingly postulates this may be achieved by engaging in some form of theoretical sampling. In this regard, this paper describes a two-phase method for generating comparative samples from theories, involving six distinct steps.
期刊介绍:
The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods (EJBRM) provides perspectives on topics relevant to research methods applied in the field of business and management. Through its publication the journal contributes to the development of theory and practice. The journal accepts academically robust papers that contribute to the area of research methods applied in business and management research. Papers submitted to the journal are double-blind reviewed by members of the reviewer committee or other suitably qualified readers. The Editor reserves the right to reject papers that, in the view of the editorial board, are either of insufficient quality, or are not relevant enough to the subject area. The editor is happy to discuss contributions before submission. The journal publishes work in the categories described below. Research Papers: These may be qualitative or quantitative, empirical or theoretical in nature and can discuss completed research findings or work in progress. Case Studies: Case studies are welcomed illustrating business and management research methods in practise. View Points: View points are less academically rigorous articles usually in areas of controversy which will fuel some interesting debate. Conference Reports and Book Reviews: Anyone who attends a conference or reads a book that they feel contributes to the area of Business Research Methods is encouraged to submit a review for publication.