Meaning and Method in the Social Sciences: A Case for Methodological Pluralism. Paul A. Roth

1989 ◽  
Vol 69 (3) ◽  
pp. 465-465
Author(s):  
Jay Kilby
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Methodological Pluralism ◽  
The Social

Methods for mapping the impact of social sciences and humanities—A literature review

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Budtz Pedersen ◽  
Jonas Følsgaard Grønvad ◽  
Rolf Hvidtfeldt
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Research Impact ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Methodological Pluralism ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Funding Agencies ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Impact

Abstract This article explores the current literature on ‘research impact’ in the social sciences and humanities (SSH). By providing a comprehensive review of available literature, drawing on national and international experiences, we take a systematic look at the impact agenda within SSH. The primary objective of this article is to examine key methodological components used to assess research impact comparing the advantages and disadvantages of each method. The study finds that research impact is a highly complex and contested concept in the SSH literature. Drawing on the strong methodological pluralism emerging in the literature, we conclude that there is considerable room for researchers, universities, and funding agencies to establish impact assessment tools directed towards specific missions while avoiding catch-all indicators and universal metrics.

Social Ontology and Varieties of Interpretation: A Hermeneutic Critique of Searle

2017 ◽  
Vol 48 (2) ◽  
pp. 192-217
Author(s):  
Hans-Herbert Kögler
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Social Ontology ◽  
Careful Analysis ◽  
Methodological Pluralism ◽  
John Searle ◽  
The Social ◽  
Hermeneutic Approach ◽  
Social Scientific ◽  
Argument Proceeds ◽  
Block Approach

The essay probes the limits of social ontology as a grounding project for interpretation and explanation in the social sciences. The argument proceeds by challenging the exemplary and influential ontology of John Searle by means of Jim Bohman’s hermeneutic approach. While both share the interest in establishing the validity basis of social-scientific claims, Bohman reconstructs in this regard the situated standpoint of the hermeneutic interpreter, in contrast to Searle’s building block approach to social reality. A careful analysis of Bohman’s argumentation reveals the need for differentiating a variety of interpretive stances, which leads back to important revisions of the intentionality-based social ontology of Searle. The discussion results in the need to ground methodological pluralism in a universal hermeneutics of interpretive capabilities to safeguard the social sciences against relativistic as well as metaphysical challenges.

What Can We Learn From Factorial Surveys About Human Behavior?

Methodology ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-30 ◽  
Author(s):  
Knut Petzold ◽  
Tobias Wolbring
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Behavioral Intentions ◽  
Actual Behavior ◽  
Full Time ◽  
Factorial Survey ◽  
Survey Experiment ◽  
Intended Behavior ◽  
The Social ◽  
Survey Experiments ◽  
High Level

Abstract. Factorial survey experiments are increasingly used in the social sciences to investigate behavioral intentions. The measurement of self-reported behavioral intentions with factorial survey experiments frequently assumes that the determinants of intended behavior affect actual behavior in a similar way. We critically investigate this fundamental assumption using the misdirected email technique. Student participants of a survey were randomly assigned to a field experiment or a survey experiment. The email informs the recipient about the reception of a scholarship with varying stakes (full-time vs. book) and recipient’s names (German vs. Arabic). In the survey experiment, respondents saw an image of the same email. This validation design ensured a high level of correspondence between units, settings, and treatments across both studies. Results reveal that while the frequencies of self-reported intentions and actual behavior deviate, treatments show similar relative effects. Hence, although further research on this topic is needed, this study suggests that determinants of behavior might be inferred from behavioral intentions measured with survey experiments.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document