传播学的定性研究有多“合格”?考察媒介研究中的语用和接受

Gregory Gondwe
{"title":"传播学的定性研究有多“合格”?考察媒介研究中的语用和接受","authors":"Gregory Gondwe","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3562046","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this study is two-fold: It first replicates previous studies on methods used in communication research, and then textually analyses each article in the five high ranking Communication journals of the United States published in the year 2016. A total of 160 articles were analyzed for their use in qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods, as well as the particular type of design qualitative or quantitative used. Findings indicate that most journals prefer quantitative articles as opposed to qualitative or mixed methods research. 59.37% of the articles were quantitative, while qualitative and mixed methods recorded 38.75 and 1.87% respectively. Further, findings also indicated that descriptive quantitative methods (53.68%) were mostly preferred over correlations, quasi-experiments, and experiments. Similarly, findings over qualitative research suggested that the grounding theory method (31%) was the most preferred over the four other qualitative research designs. The study, therefore, concludes that quantitative research articles with a focus on descriptive methods had a higher chance of being published in the US Communication Journals than qualitative methods. The lowest chances of publication were in mixed methods and ethnographic qualitative methods that recorded less than 2% probability of being published.","PeriodicalId":11465,"journal":{"name":"Econometrics: Econometric & Statistical Methods - General eJournal","volume":"50 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How ‘Qualitable’ Is Qualitative Research in Communication Studies? Examining the Pragmatic Use and Acceptance in Media Studies\",\"authors\":\"Gregory Gondwe\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3562046\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The aim of this study is two-fold: It first replicates previous studies on methods used in communication research, and then textually analyses each article in the five high ranking Communication journals of the United States published in the year 2016. A total of 160 articles were analyzed for their use in qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods, as well as the particular type of design qualitative or quantitative used. Findings indicate that most journals prefer quantitative articles as opposed to qualitative or mixed methods research. 59.37% of the articles were quantitative, while qualitative and mixed methods recorded 38.75 and 1.87% respectively. Further, findings also indicated that descriptive quantitative methods (53.68%) were mostly preferred over correlations, quasi-experiments, and experiments. Similarly, findings over qualitative research suggested that the grounding theory method (31%) was the most preferred over the four other qualitative research designs. The study, therefore, concludes that quantitative research articles with a focus on descriptive methods had a higher chance of being published in the US Communication Journals than qualitative methods. The lowest chances of publication were in mixed methods and ethnographic qualitative methods that recorded less than 2% probability of being published.\",\"PeriodicalId\":11465,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Econometrics: Econometric & Statistical Methods - General eJournal\",\"volume\":\"50 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-03-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Econometrics: Econometric & Statistical Methods - General eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3562046\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Econometrics: Econometric & Statistical Methods - General eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3562046","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究的目的有两个方面:首先,它复制了之前关于传播学研究方法的研究,然后对2016年发表在美国五大传播学期刊上的每篇文章进行了文本分析。总共分析了160篇文章,分析了它们在定性、定量或混合方法中的使用情况,以及所使用的定性或定量设计的特定类型。研究结果表明,大多数期刊更喜欢定量文章,而不是定性或混合方法的研究。定量法占59.37%,定性法和混合法分别占38.75%和1.87%。此外,研究结果还表明,描述性定量方法(53.68%)比相关性、准实验和实验方法更受青睐。同样,定性研究的结果表明,接地理论方法(31%)比其他四种定性研究设计更受欢迎。因此,这项研究得出的结论是,专注于描述性方法的定量研究文章比定性方法更有可能在美国传播期刊上发表。发表的机会最低的是混合方法和人种学定性方法,记录的发表概率低于2%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How ‘Qualitable’ Is Qualitative Research in Communication Studies? Examining the Pragmatic Use and Acceptance in Media Studies
The aim of this study is two-fold: It first replicates previous studies on methods used in communication research, and then textually analyses each article in the five high ranking Communication journals of the United States published in the year 2016. A total of 160 articles were analyzed for their use in qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods, as well as the particular type of design qualitative or quantitative used. Findings indicate that most journals prefer quantitative articles as opposed to qualitative or mixed methods research. 59.37% of the articles were quantitative, while qualitative and mixed methods recorded 38.75 and 1.87% respectively. Further, findings also indicated that descriptive quantitative methods (53.68%) were mostly preferred over correlations, quasi-experiments, and experiments. Similarly, findings over qualitative research suggested that the grounding theory method (31%) was the most preferred over the four other qualitative research designs. The study, therefore, concludes that quantitative research articles with a focus on descriptive methods had a higher chance of being published in the US Communication Journals than qualitative methods. The lowest chances of publication were in mixed methods and ethnographic qualitative methods that recorded less than 2% probability of being published.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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