[Xmca-l] Re: The Science of Qualitative Research 2ed

Mon Dec 18 14:18:42 PST 2017

Michael,
I'll bite.
How is it that or in what sense does Vygotsky reject interpret(at)ive
(qualitative) methods?
Interested to hear more.
-greg

On Sun, Dec 17, 2017 at 6:39 PM, Wolff-Michael Roth <
wolffmichael.roth@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Martin,
> the term quantitative is a misnomer in the sense that qualitative
> researchers are counting, and this does not mean that they do the kind of
> research that generally is referred to as quantitative. There are forms of
> statistical inference and experimental research that people use, which are
> distinct from observations in ethnographic research.
>
> Kadriye Ercikan (statistician) and I (statistician turned "qualitative" and
> mixed methods researcher) once edited a book with some of the leading U.S.
> scholars concerning method of all types. The consensus was that the
> distinction quantitative/qualitative does not make much sense. Here the
> book:
> Ercikan, K., & Roth, W.-M. (Eds.). (2008). Generalizing from educational
> research: Beyond qualitative and quantitative polarization. New York, NY:
> Routledge.
>
> Kadriye and I also wrote a couple of articles on the topic, and in the
> first one (2006) argue that it doesn't make much sense to polarize
> research.
> Ercikan, K., & Roth, W.-M. (2014). Limits of generalizing in education
> research: Why criteria for research generalization should include
> population heterogeneity and users of knowledge claims. Teachers College
> Record, 116(5), 1–28
> Ercikan, K., & Roth, W.-M. (2006). What good is polarizing research into
> qualitative and quantitative? Educational Researcher, 35 (5), 14-23.
>
> You also know that Vygotsky not only rejects the "scientific psychology"
> (quantitative?!) but also the "interpret(at)ive psychology"
> (qualitative?!).
>
> Michael
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Wolff-Michael Roth, Lansdowne Professor
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> --------------------
> Applied Cognitive Science
> MacLaurin Building A567
> University of Victoria
> Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2
> http://web.uvic.ca/~mroth <http://education2.uvic.ca/faculty/mroth/>
>
> New book: *The Mathematics of Mathematics
> <https://www.sensepublishers.com/catalogs/bookseries/new-
> directions-in-mathematics-and-science-education/the-
> mathematics-of-mathematics/>*
>
> On Sun, Dec 17, 2017 at 5:12 PM, Martin John Packer <
> mpacker@uniandes.edu.co
> > wrote:
>
> > Hi Huw,
> >
> > In the field of research methodology in the social sciences the labels
> > “quantitative” and “qualitative” are somewhat misleading; the issues at
> > stake are better viewed as paradigmatic ones, rather than whether or not
> > one uses numbers.
> >
> > The position I develop in the book is that the logical positivists’
> > attempt to define a single scientific method has been a disaster for
> > psychology, in particular. Positivism has led to the view that the ‘gold
> > standard’ for research is a randomized clinical trial, in which one
> seeks a
> > causal explanation of a phenomenon through testing a hypothesis, by
> > defining and manipulating variables, and by measuring outcomes. This
> > approach is what has come to be called “quantitative” research, and it is
> > what is taught in most research methods classes. It is an approach that
> > assumes that all explanation is causal, when in fact many explanations
> are
> > constitutive. It assumes that causes are invisible and must be inferred:
> > they are not, much of science involves making causal processes visible.
> And
> > it assumes that measurement is an objective process: it is not, it always
> > involves theory and interpretation.
> >
> > I have nothing against numbers, and have no quarrel with mathematics. I
> > studied math and physics as an undergraduate until specializing in
> > psychology (which was considered a natural science) in the final year.
> But
> > understanding what people do has always struck me as requiring something
> > more than this. My book explores the ‘what more?’
> >
> > Martin
> >
> > > On Dec 17, 2017, at 4:29 AM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Martin,
> > >
> > > Do you define quality? And if not can you tell me why, from your
> > > perspective, QR avoids defining it?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Huw
> > >
> > > On 17 December 2017 at 01:15, Martin John Packer <
> > mpacker@uniandes.edu.co>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi Helen,
> > >>
> > >> It’s not a how-to book, but rather an exploration of the roots of
> > >> qualitative research — phenomenology, hermeneutics, critical theory -
> > and
> > >> an examination of the logic underlying interviews, ethnographic
> > fieldwork,
> > >> and analysis of interaction. That might be too theoretical for your
> > class.
> > >> I continue to work away at a book on how to do qualitative research,
> > which
> > >> I have taught many times. In case it’s useful I’ve attached the
> syllabus
> > >> from the last time I taught the course in English. You’ll see I
> assigned
> > >> only selected chapters from the first edition.
> > >>
> > >> But of course you should still buy a copy for each of your friends!
> :)
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>> On Dec 16, 2017, at 7:15 PM, Helena Worthen <helenaworthen@gmail.com
> >
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Martin, I’ve just been given the go-head to teach a social science
> > >> research methods class to undergraduates at Ton Duc Thang U. in Ho Chi
> > Minh
> > >> City, VN. This sounds like a humane book - do you think it could be
> used
> > >> for undergraduates?
> > >>>
> > >>> The undergrads are in the Faculty of Labor Relations and Trade Unions
> > so
> > >> the sites of their research will be workplaces.
> > >>>
> > >>> H
> > >>>
> > >>> Helena Worthen
> > >>> helenaworthen@gmail.com
> > >>> Berkeley, CA 94707 510-828-2745
> > >>> Blog US/ Viet Nam:
> > >>> helenaworthen.wordpress.com
> > >>> skype: helena.worthen1
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>> On Dec 16, 2017, at 2:19 PM, Martin John Packer <
> > >> mpacker@uniandes.edu.co> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Cambridge University Press, in their infinite wisdom, have just
> > >> published an expanded second edition of my book The Science of
> > Qualitative
> > >> Research. It will be a perfect holiday gift for a loved one!  :)
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The book continues to make the case that a common view of
> qualitative
> > >> research — that it amounts to a set of techniques for describing
> > people’s
> > >> subjective experience — is mistaken. I propose that in fact
> qualitative
> > >> research can take us beyond the taken for granted ontological dualisms
> > of
> > >> subjectivity/objectivity, mind/world, and appearance/reality. Human
> > beings
> > >> have created the worlds, the cultures, in which we live, and we are
> > >> products of these worlds. Qualitative research can be the study of the
> > >> ‘ontological complicity’ that people have with the social reality in
> > which
> > >> they live, and the ‘constitution’ in which specific ways of being
> human
> > are
> > >> formed. The constituents of qualitative research — and in the book I
> > focus
> > >> on three: interviews, analysis of interaction, and ethnographic field
> > work
> > >> — can be combined and aligned to focus on ontology, in a scientific
> > study
> > >> of the constitution of human beings. This science is centrally a
> matter
> > of
> > >> interpretation, of hermeneutics, not of coding.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The new material includes a discussion of the centrality of
> > >> constitution (not only causation) in every scientific discipline --
> > think
> > >> of Watson and Crick discovering how DNA is constituted -- in Chapter
> 1.
> > >> Discussion of Bruno Latour’s work has been included in several
> chapters:
> > >> there are treatments of his book Laboratory Life, of actor-network
> > theory,
> > >> and of his Inquiry into Modes of Existence.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> In addition, a new final chapter presents as an example and case
> study
> > >> the research conducted by Löic Wacquant with boxers in south Chicago.
> > >> Wacquant joined the gym, learned to box, and came to be on familiar
> > terms
> > >> with the men who were becoming constituted as boxers. His ethnographic
> > >> fieldwork focused on the bodily practices of the boxing life, while
> his
> > >> interviews illustrated how the boxer’s ontological complicity with
> this
> > >> life builds a way of understanding the gym, and the body. Wacquant
> > helps us
> > >> to see the ideals and morality that are inherent in a boxer’s way of
> > human
> > >> being, of being human. His research illustrates the potential of
> > >> qualitative research to enable us to recognize the diverse ways in
> which
> > >> people make themselves into particular kinds of person, so we can
> better
> > >> understand the ethical freedom that is key to being human. This, in my
> > >> view, is what makes this kind of scientific investigation both
> exciting
> > and
> > >> important.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> CUP:
> > >>>> <http://www.cambridge.org/co/academic/subjects/social-
> > >> science-research-methods/qualitative-methods/science-
> > >> qualitative-research-2nd-edition?format=HB&isbn=9781108404501>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Amazon:
> > >>>> <https://www.amazon.com/gp/search?index=books&linkCode=
> > >> qs&keywords=9781108417129>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Facebook author’s page:
> > >>>> <https://www.facebook.com/pg/The-Science-of-Qualitative-
> > >> Research-2e-1851273521851365/posts/?ref=page_internal>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Martin
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> >
> >
>


-- 
Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Department of Anthropology
880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
WEBSITE: greg.a.thompson.byu.edu
http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson