The Division of Labor in Social Science Research
"Unified Methodology or "Organic Solidarity
Dados Bibliográficos
| ID | 6355601 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Rounak Sil (0000-0001-9502-3122, autor correspondente), Rudra Sil |
| Ano | 2000 |
| Volume | 32 |
| Fascículo | 4 |
| Páginas | 499-531 |
| Data de publicação | 2000-06-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sim |
| Open Access | Não |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Periódico | Polity (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores do periódico | ISSN: 0032-3497 • E-ISSN: 1744-1684 |
| Editora | University of Chicago Press (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.2307/3235291 |
| OpenAlex | W2318938955 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Citações recebidas | 12 |
Since contending methodological perspectives and different types of research products are founded on irreconcilable philosophical assumptions, the sharp, recurrent debates over social science research methods are likely to be fruitless and counterproductive. This article begins by exposing some of the philosophical assumptions underlying the most recent calls for a unified social science methodology and seeks to help develop a common appreciation of how different kinds of methods and research products advance our understanding of different aspects of social life at different levels of abstraction. Such commonly posited dichotomies as deductivist/inductivist logic, quantitative/qualitative analysis, and nomothetic/idiographic research products are shown to obscure significant differences along a continuum of strategies through which context-bound information and analytic constructs are combined to produce interpretations of varying degrees of complexity or generality. Durkheim's conception of "organic solidarity" in a social "division of labor" serves as a useful metaphor here to capture the complementary roles performed by various research products as well as the trade-offs arising from the strengths and weaknesses of various methodological approaches (ranging from formal and statistical approaches to various case-based and interpretive approaches). Thus, sharp claims regarding the strengths and limitations of particular methods are transformed into elements of an overarching agnostic understanding of the trade-offs and complementarities among these methods. Finally, a distinctive role is identified for an ideal-typical "middle-range" comparative-historical approach in fostering greater communication among a more inclusively defined community of methodologically diverse social scientists
Context (archaeology · Dichotomy · Epistemology · Generality · Metaphor · Metatheory · Nomothetic · Nomothetic and idiographic · Openness to experience · Political science · Politics · Social science · Sociology · Solidarity · Strengths and weaknesses · Contemporary Sociological Theory and Practice · Critical Realism in Sociology · Law · Psychology · Social and Cultural Dynamics · Social Psychology
Theoretical psychology
Training the Next Generation of Media Researchers
Scholarly Solidarity
Can Understanding Undermine Explanation? The Confused Experience of Revolution
What Can We Learn from History
Concepts and Measurement in Multimethod Research
The Limits of Normalization
Multi-methodology research and democratization studies
Context-Sensitive Inquiry in Comparative Judicial Research
Qualitative Methods
Beyond metatheory
The theory and method of comparative area studies
| Obras citantes distintas | 12 |
|---|---|
| Citações por ano | 0,52 |
| Intervalo de citações | 2003 - 2023 (21) |
| Velocidade de citação | historical |
| Altamente citado | Não |
| Tipos de citação | Neutras: 12 |