|
?:abstract
|
-
In this article, I address the research question "which are the conventions embedded in quality criteria of empirical social research?" A deductive qualitative content analysis has been conducted of two encyclopedia articles on qualitative (i.e., non-standardized) and quantitative (i.e., standardized) quality criteria, and the suggestions for overarching quality criteria for qualitative empirical research by STRÜBING, HIRSCHAUER, AYAß, KRÄHNKE und SCHEFFER (2018). For the deductive qualitative content analysis, I extracted categories from the ideal type orders of worth framework by BOLTANSKI and THÉVENOT (2014 [1991). From the systematic comparison, I extracted ten conventions of empirical social research, which I organized into three groups: the cognitive convention of social science engineering (mechanical convention), cognitive-social conventions guiding the research process (appropriateness, including intersubjective comprehensibility, discovery, and iteration and distancing conventions), and socio-cognitive conventions addressing the role of empirical social researchers (black-out researchers, mandarin/master, expert/specialist, research-lyrics, popularity, and methods concept conventions). Changing from context of discovery to context of application, the nine conventions were used to analyze the suggested quality criteria for analytical sociology by OTTE et al. (2023). At the end of the article, I argue for establishing a deep understanding of quality criteria for empirical social research.
(xsd:string)
|
![[This page as RDF]](https://data.gesis.org/gesiskg/static/rdf-icon.gif){kind=icon}