The nonprofit sector research fund

1992 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 105-110
Author(s):  
Elizabeth T. Boris
1989 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 91
Author(s):  
Dennis R. Young ◽  
Paul J. DiMaggio ◽  
Walter W. Powell

2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aya Okada ◽  
Yu Ishida ◽  
Takako Nakajima ◽  
Yasuhiko Kotagiri

2020 ◽  
pp. 089976402097765
Author(s):  
Jennifer A. Jones ◽  
Robert Donmoyer

Historically, bias has been viewed as a problem with qualitative research, in large part because the researcher is often a qualitative study’s primary (or, in some cases, only) research “instrument.” Even most constructivists who reject traditional notions of scientific objectivity want to produce reasonably accurate reconstructions of their research participants’ interpretations of the social world. In fact, presenting accurate reconstructions is one thing constructivists mean when they talk about a study’s trustworthiness. Various procedures have been developed to minimize bias and ensure trustworthiness. The Formative Influences Timeline (FIT) is one such procedure. This article provides a brief history of bias in qualitative research, describes the FIT and how to use it, and reviews nonprofit research studies that either employed—or could have employed—the FIT to produce data relatively uncontaminated by researchers’ a priori assumptions. The article concludes by acknowledging limitations of the FIT.


2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aya Okada ◽  
Yu Ishida ◽  
Takako Nakajima ◽  
Yasuhiko Kotagiri

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document