Is Causal-Process Observation an Oxymoron?
Is Causal-Process Observation an Oxymoron?
复制标题
因果过程观察是矛盾的吗？
DOI：
10.1093/pan/mpj015
复制
发表时间：
2006
影响因子：
5.4
通讯作者：
Nathaniel L. Beck
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Nathaniel L. Beck
当我第一次读到金、基奥汉和韦尔巴（King，Keohane，and Verba，1994）（KKV）时，我对一个在我看来显而易见但通常是不言而喻的想法感到兴奋，即所有的政治科学家，无论是定量的还是定性的，都是科学家，并受到相同的科学标准的支配。KKV，as亨利布雷迪（布雷迪and Collier 2004，chap. 3)聪明的笔记，显然是在向定性研究者说教，说教的主题是定性研究者应该采用定量研究中的许多思想标准。因此，为了滥用隐喻和KKV，人们可能会将KKV与宗教裁判所的观点进行比较，即我们都是上帝的孩子。但是，在经历了许多基于案例研究的演讲之后，我很清楚，让每个人都思考我们所从事的科学事业的本质只能是一件好事。
When I first read King, Keohane, and Verba (1994) (KKV), I was excited by the general theme of what seemed to me the obvious, but usually unspoken, idea that all political scientists, both quantitative and qualitative, are scientists and governed by the same scientific standards. KKV, as Henry Brady (Brady and Collier 2004, chap. 3) cleverly notes, clearly were preaching to the qualitative researcher, and the subject of the sermon was that qualitative researchers should adopt many of the ideas standard in quantitative research. Thus, to abuse both the metaphor and KKV, one might compare KKV to the view of the Inquisition that we are all God's children. But, having sat through many talks based on case studies, it is clear to me that getting everyone to think about the nature of the scientific enterprise we are all engaged in can only be a good thing.