Editorial Essay: The Tumult over Transparency: Decoupling Transparency from Replication in Establishing Trustworthy Qualitative Research*
Editorial Essay: The Tumult over Transparency: Decoupling Transparency from Replication in Establishing Trustworthy Qualitative Research*
复制标题
DOI：
10.1177/0001839219887663
复制
发表时间：
2019-11-06
影响因子：
10.4
通讯作者：
Whittington, Richard
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Pratt, Michael G.;Kaplan, Sarah;Whittington, Richard
管理类期刊目前正在应对实验社会心理学中的“复制危机”所带来的挑战，这导致了透明度的新标准。这些方法正在以无益的、甚至可能是危险的方式蔓延到定性研究。定性研究透明度的倡导者错误地将其与复制联系在一起。将透明度与复制紧密地捆绑在一起，对于定性研究来说是非常麻烦的，因为复制没有抓住工作试图实现的重点。我们建议，透明度倡导者将复制与可信度混为一谈。我们从本体论和方法论两个方面对这种混为一谈提出了挑战，并为如何(以及如何不)在定性研究中思考可信度提供了替代方案。管理期刊需要通过确定增强可信度的解决方案，认识到我们领域不同方法方法的独特优势和考虑因素，来解决这场关于透明度的骚动所引发的核心问题。
Management journals are currently responding to challenges raised by the "replication crisis" in experimental social psychology, leading to new standards for transparency. These approaches are spilling over to qualitative research in unhelpful and potentially even dangerous ways. Advocates for transparency in qualitative research mistakenly couple it with replication. Tying transparency tightly to replication is deeply troublesome for qualitative research, where replication misses the point of what the work seeks to accomplish. We suggest that transparency advocates conflate replication with trustworthiness. We challenge this conflation on both ontological and methodological grounds, and we offer alternatives for how to (and how not to) think about trustworthiness in qualitative research. Management journals need to tackle the core issues raised by this tumult over transparency by identifying solutions for enhanced trustworthiness that recognize the unique strengths and considerations of different methodological approaches in our field.