{"title":"抽样社会运动组织","authors":"K. Andrews, Bob Edwards, Akram Al-Turk, A. Hunter","doi":"10.17813/1086-671X-21-2-231","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Scholars of nonprofits, interest groups, civic associations, and social movement organizations employ samples of organizations derived from directories or other available listings. In most cases, we are unable to evaluate the representativeness of these samples. Using data on the population of environmental organizations in North Carolina, we assess the methodological strengths and weaknesses of widely used strategies. We find that reliance on any single source yields bias on theoretically important characteristics of organizations. We show that scholars can reduce bias significantly by combining sources, creating what we call a “peak list” compiled from different types of sources. Compared to any single source, our peak list differed less from the population on the thirty-one organizational characteristics including geographical coverage, issues, discursive frames, targets, and organizational demographics such as age, organizational form, and resources. From these analyses, we offer methodological recomm...","PeriodicalId":47309,"journal":{"name":"Mobilization","volume":"21 1","pages":"231-246"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2016-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.17813/1086-671X-21-2-231","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sampling Social Movement Organizations\",\"authors\":\"K. Andrews, Bob Edwards, Akram Al-Turk, A. Hunter\",\"doi\":\"10.17813/1086-671X-21-2-231\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Scholars of nonprofits, interest groups, civic associations, and social movement organizations employ samples of organizations derived from directories or other available listings. In most cases, we are unable to evaluate the representativeness of these samples. Using data on the population of environmental organizations in North Carolina, we assess the methodological strengths and weaknesses of widely used strategies. We find that reliance on any single source yields bias on theoretically important characteristics of organizations. We show that scholars can reduce bias significantly by combining sources, creating what we call a “peak list” compiled from different types of sources. Compared to any single source, our peak list differed less from the population on the thirty-one organizational characteristics including geographical coverage, issues, discursive frames, targets, and organizational demographics such as age, organizational form, and resources. From these analyses, we offer methodological recomm...\",\"PeriodicalId\":47309,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Mobilization\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"231-246\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-07-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.17813/1086-671X-21-2-231\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Mobilization\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17813/1086-671X-21-2-231\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mobilization","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17813/1086-671X-21-2-231","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Scholars of nonprofits, interest groups, civic associations, and social movement organizations employ samples of organizations derived from directories or other available listings. In most cases, we are unable to evaluate the representativeness of these samples. Using data on the population of environmental organizations in North Carolina, we assess the methodological strengths and weaknesses of widely used strategies. We find that reliance on any single source yields bias on theoretically important characteristics of organizations. We show that scholars can reduce bias significantly by combining sources, creating what we call a “peak list” compiled from different types of sources. Compared to any single source, our peak list differed less from the population on the thirty-one organizational characteristics including geographical coverage, issues, discursive frames, targets, and organizational demographics such as age, organizational form, and resources. From these analyses, we offer methodological recomm...
期刊介绍:
Mobilization: An International Quarterly is the premier journal of research specializing in social movements, protests, insurgencies, revolutions, and other forms of contentious politics. Mobilization was first published in 1996 to fill the need for a scholarly review of research that focused exclusively with social movements, protest and collective action. Mobilization is fully peer-reviewed and widely indexed. A 2003 study, when Mobilization was published semiannually, showed that its citation index rate was 1.286, which placed it among the top ten sociology journals. Today, Mobilization is published four times a year, in March, June, September, and December. The editorial board is composed of thirty internationally recognized scholars from political science, sociology and social psychology. The goal of Mobilization is to provide a forum for global, scholarly dialogue. It is currently distributed to the top international research libraries and read by the most engaged scholars in the field. We hope that through its wide distribution, different research strategies and theoretical/conceptual approaches will be shared among the global community of social movement scholars, encouraging a collaborative process that will further the development of a cumulative social science.