The Method Section as Conceptual Epicenter in Constructing Social Science Research Reports

Datos Bibliográficos

ID23349363
AutoresP Smagorinsky (0000-0002-4346-3705, University of Georgia, autor de correspondencia)
Año2008
Volumen25
Número3
Páginas389-411
Fecha de publicación2008-07-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaWritten Communication (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0741-0883 • E-ISSN: 1552-8472
EditorialSAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1177/0741088308317815
OpenAlexW2025449514
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas135
Referencias citadas22

In this article, the author argues that Method sections in social science research reports, particularly those that employ qualitative methods, often lack sufficient detail to make any results that follow from the analytic method trustworthy. The author provides a brief review of the evolution of the Method section from the 1960s to the present, makes a case for a more robust reporting of research method, and then outlines one way to achieve the end of providing a detailed, specific account of research methods that enable readers to understand unambiguously the means by which data are rendered into results. This consideration includes attention to the reporting of data collection, data reduction, data analysis, and the context of the investigation to make it clear why an illustrative presentation of data supports the claim that it offers.

Context (archaeology) · Data collection · Data presentation · Data science · Engineering ethics · Epistemology · Internet privacy · Presentation (obstetrics) · Qualitative research · Section (typography) · Social science · Sociology · Trustworthiness · Computer Science · Engineering · History · Qualitative Research Methods and Applications