Researching the future: method or madness?
Researching the future: method or madness?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/s0016-3287(03)00069-7
复制
发表时间：
2003-12-01
期刊：
影响因子：
3
通讯作者：
Blass, E
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Blass, E
本文探讨了期货研究背后的方法论问题，质疑是否有可能声称期货研究方法论上的“声音”，并批评期货方法论如何适合目前在研究领域公认的方法论范式。在何种程度上期货方法论可以被认为是一种范式本身的权利，也检查是期货研究的理论基础。虽然所有的证据都对期货方法论的形式提出了许多问题，但缺乏明确性并不会使期货研究无效或不可靠，因此，从期货“数据”的混乱中得出的意义确实确保了期货研究可以基于方法而不是疯狂。(C)2003 Elsevier Ltd.保留所有权利。
This paper examines the methodological issues behind futures studies, questioning whether it is possible to claim a futures study as methodologically 'sound', and critiquing how futures methodology fits within the methodological paradigms currently recognised in the research field. The extent to which futures methodology can be considered a paradigm in its own right is also examined as are the assumptive foundations of futures studies. While all the evidence raises many questions as to the form of futures methodology, the lack of clarity does not make a futures study invalid or unreliable, and hence sensemaking from the chaos of futures 'data' does ensure that futures studies can be based on method rather than madness. (C) 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.