Data Access and Research Transparency in the Qualitative Tradition
Data Access and Research Transparency in the Qualitative Tradition
复制标题
DOI：
10.1017/s1049096513001777
复制
发表时间：
2014-01-01
影响因子：
3.3
通讯作者：
Kapiszewski, Diana
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Elman, Colin;Kapiszewski, Diana
作为一个抽象的概念，开放是很难被反对的。来自每一个研究传统的社会科学家都认为，学者们不能只是断言他们的结论，还必须分享他们的证据基础，并解释他们是如何得出结论的。然而，实践并不总是遵循这一原则。大多数形式的定性实证调查都采取了一种极简主义的开放性方法，只提供关于研究过程的有限信息，很少或根本没有访问支撑研究结果的数据。学者们在进行研究时做了什么，他们如何生成数据，以及他们如何根据这些数据做出解释或推断，在他们发表的研究中很少有详细的论述。即使是在有长篇序言和脚注的书籍长度的专著中，有时也需要大量的侦探工作来拼凑出作者是如何得出结论的。
As an abstract idea, openness is difficult to oppose. Social scientists from every research tradition agree that scholars cannot just assert their conclusions, but must also share their evidentiary basis and explain how they were reached. Yet practice has not always followed this principle. Most forms of qualitative empirical inquiry have taken a minimalist approach to openness, providing only limited information about the research process, and little or no access to the data underpinning findings. What scholars do when conducting research, how they generate data, and how they make interpretations or draw inferences on the basis of those data, are rarely addressed at length in their published research. Even in book-length monographs which have an extended preface and footnotes, it can sometimes take considerable detective work to piece together a picture of how authors arrived at their conclusions.