WEKO3
アイテム
{"_buckets": {"deposit": "1266f893-4304-4015-aca5-d2523e3631cc"}, "_deposit": {"created_by": 18, "id": "1072", "owners": [18], "pid": {"revision_id": 0, "type": "depid", "value": "1072"}, "status": "published"}, "_oai": {"id": "oai:jicari.repo.nii.ac.jp:00001072", "sets": ["634", "664"]}, "author_link": ["1574"], "item_10004_biblio_info_7": {"attribute_name": "書誌情報", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"bibliographicIssueDates": {"bibliographicIssueDate": "2021-08-31", "bibliographicIssueDateType": "Issued"}, "bibliographicIssueNumber": "15", "bibliographicPageEnd": "19", "bibliographicPageStart": "1", "bibliographic_titles": [{"bibliographic_title": "開発協力文献レビュー"}, {"bibliographic_title": "Literature Review", "bibliographic_titleLang": "en"}]}]}, "item_10004_description_5": {"attribute_name": "抄録", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"subitem_description": "Qualitative research is very popular in social science. When compared with quantitative research\nstudies, the common characteristics seen among qualitative research studies stand out. Nonetheless,\nwhen the philosophical and methodologi cal foundations of the latter are examined carefully, their\nvariations surface. Qualitative research is not a unified paradigm. The current paper reviews the\nliterature on research paradigms in social science and based on this review presents four implicat ions\nregarding the evaluation of qualitative research studies. These are: (1) the necessity for divergent\nevaluation criteria, (2) the importance of a clear indication of the researchers’ paradigm, (3) the\npossibility of a single criterion, and (4) the imp racticality of setting evaluation criteria. These\nimplications are contradictory. This incompatibility reflects the complexity of establishing evaluation\ncriteria for qualitative research studies and the diversity of these studies. At the end, the paper al so\nprovides an implication for researchers in international development studies (IDS). Namely, the IDS\nresearchers should be self reflexive in the research paradigm of their own studies.", "subitem_description_type": "Abstract"}]}, "item_10004_identifier_registration": {"attribute_name": "ID登録", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"subitem_identifier_reg_text": "10.18884/00001050", "subitem_identifier_reg_type": "JaLC"}]}, "item_10004_publisher_8": {"attribute_name": "出版者", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"subitem_publisher": "JICA Ogata Sadako Research Institute for Peace and Development"}]}, "item_creator": {"attribute_name": "著者", "attribute_type": "creator", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"creatorNames": [{"creatorName": "Fushimi, Katsutoshi ", "creatorNameLang": "en"}], "nameIdentifiers": [{"nameIdentifier": "1574", "nameIdentifierScheme": "WEKO"}]}]}, "item_files": {"attribute_name": "ファイル情報", "attribute_type": "file", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"accessrole": "open_date", "date": [{"dateType": "Available", "dateValue": "2021-08-31"}], "displaytype": "detail", "download_preview_message": "", "file_order": 0, "filename": "JICA-RI_Literature_Review_No.15.pdf", "filesize": [{"value": "1.1 MB"}], "format": "application/pdf", "future_date_message": "", "is_thumbnail": false, "licensetype": "license_11", "mimetype": "application/pdf", "size": 1100000.0, "url": {"label": "JICA-RI_Literature_Review_No.15", "url": "https://jicari.repo.nii.ac.jp/record/1072/files/JICA-RI_Literature_Review_No.15.pdf"}, "version_id": "c0e1b15f-d6cd-4de3-9527-4f70dc1c64c9"}]}, "item_language": {"attribute_name": "言語", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"subitem_language": "eng"}]}, "item_resource_type": {"attribute_name": "資源タイプ", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"resourcetype": "article", "resourceuri": "http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501"}]}, "item_title": "Qualitative Research is not a Unified Paradigm: Implications for the Evaluation of Qualitative Research Studies", "item_titles": {"attribute_name": "タイトル", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"subitem_title": "Qualitative Research is not a Unified Paradigm: Implications for the Evaluation of Qualitative Research Studies"}, {"subitem_title": "Qualitative Research is not a Unified Paradigm: Implications for the Evaluation of Qualitative Research Studies", "subitem_title_language": "en"}]}, "item_type_id": "10004", "owner": "18", "path": ["634", "664"], "permalink_uri": "https://doi.org/10.18884/00001050", "pubdate": {"attribute_name": "公開日", "attribute_value": "2021-08-31"}, "publish_date": "2021-08-31", "publish_status": "0", "recid": "1072", "relation": {}, "relation_version_is_last": true, "title": ["Qualitative Research is not a Unified Paradigm: Implications for the Evaluation of Qualitative Research Studies"], "weko_shared_id": -1}
Qualitative Research is not a Unified Paradigm: Implications for the Evaluation of Qualitative Research Studies
https://doi.org/10.18884/00001050
https://doi.org/10.18884/000010507122d9a7-6705-497e-9cd1-e7a416ab580c
名前 / ファイル | ライセンス | アクション |
---|---|---|
JICA-RI_Literature_Review_No.15 (1.1 MB)
|
Item type | 一般雑誌記事 / Article(1) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
公開日 | 2021-08-31 | |||||
タイトル | ||||||
タイトル | Qualitative Research is not a Unified Paradigm: Implications for the Evaluation of Qualitative Research Studies | |||||
タイトル | ||||||
言語 | en | |||||
タイトル | Qualitative Research is not a Unified Paradigm: Implications for the Evaluation of Qualitative Research Studies | |||||
言語 | ||||||
言語 | eng | |||||
資源タイプ | ||||||
資源タイプ識別子 | http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 | |||||
資源タイプ | article | |||||
ID登録 | ||||||
ID登録 | 10.18884/00001050 | |||||
ID登録タイプ | JaLC | |||||
著者 |
Fushimi, Katsutoshi
× Fushimi, Katsutoshi |
|||||
抄録 | ||||||
内容記述タイプ | Abstract | |||||
内容記述 | Qualitative research is very popular in social science. When compared with quantitative research studies, the common characteristics seen among qualitative research studies stand out. Nonetheless, when the philosophical and methodologi cal foundations of the latter are examined carefully, their variations surface. Qualitative research is not a unified paradigm. The current paper reviews the literature on research paradigms in social science and based on this review presents four implicat ions regarding the evaluation of qualitative research studies. These are: (1) the necessity for divergent evaluation criteria, (2) the importance of a clear indication of the researchers’ paradigm, (3) the possibility of a single criterion, and (4) the imp racticality of setting evaluation criteria. These implications are contradictory. This incompatibility reflects the complexity of establishing evaluation criteria for qualitative research studies and the diversity of these studies. At the end, the paper al so provides an implication for researchers in international development studies (IDS). Namely, the IDS researchers should be self reflexive in the research paradigm of their own studies. |
|||||
書誌情報 |
開発協力文献レビュー en : Literature Review 号 15, p. 1-19, 発行日 2021-08-31 |
|||||
出版者 | ||||||
出版者 | JICA Ogata Sadako Research Institute for Peace and Development |