透明度(行为)
合并
捆绑
复制(统计)
可信赖性
定性研究
计算机科学
互联网隐私
公共关系
社会学
政治学
认识论
计算机安全
社会科学
医学
哲学
病毒学
操作系统
作者
Michael G. Pratt,Sarah Kaplan,Richard Whittington
标识
DOI:10.1177/0001839219887663
摘要
Management journals are currently responding to challenges raised by the “replication crisis” in experimental social psychology, leading to new standards for transparency. These approaches are spilling over to qualitative research in unhelpful and potentially even dangerous ways. Advocates for transparency in qualitative research mistakenly couple it with replication. Tying transparency tightly to replication is deeply troublesome for qualitative research, where replication misses the point of what the work seeks to accomplish. We suggest that transparency advocates conflate replication with trustworthiness. We challenge this conflation on both ontological and methodological grounds, and we offer alternatives for how to (and how not to) think about trustworthiness in qualitative research. Management journals need to tackle the core issues raised by this tumult over transparency by identifying solutions for enhanced trustworthiness that recognize the unique strengths and considerations of different methodological approaches in our field.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI