From Paradigm Wars to Peaceful Coexistence? A Sociological Perspective on the Qualitative-Quantitative-Divide and Future Directions for Mixed Methods Methodology
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-24.1.3966Keywords:
mixed methods, multimethod research, methodological pluralism, reflexivity, sociology of science, science studiesAbstract
Social research today is marked by a contradictory constellation: Even though calls for methodological pluralism are prevalent and the principles of method integration are widely accepted, researchers still largely reproduce the traditional qualitative-quantitative-divide in their methodological boundary making. Actual applications of mixed and multimethod research remain a niche phenomenon. I argue that the reasons for this persistence of methodological schisms are, on the one hand, to be found in the way that pluralistic norms have successfully been integrated into the rhetoric with which proponents of qualitative and quantitative research traditions distinguish their approaches against each other. On the other hand, they also lie in the current mixed-methods-discourse and the related focus on textbook methodology and paradigmatic group identity. To strengthen the impact of mixed methods as a meta-reflexive critique of methodological schisms, methodologists should incorporate empirical studies of qualitative, quantitative, and mixed research practice into their work, and shift their focus more towards the social and cultural factors influencing methodological divisions. I outline what I consider to be core elements of such a post-methodological approach to mixed and multimethod methodology.
Downloads
References
Akademie für Soziologie (2019). Grundsätze der analytisch-empirischen Soziologie, https://akademie-soziologie.de/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Ziele-und-Aufgaben-Akademie-Soziologie-Grundsa%CC%88tze-09-2019.pdf [Accessed: June 30, 2022].
Alise, Mark A. & Teddlie, Charles (2010). A continuation of the paradigm wars?: Prevalence rates of methodological approaches across the social/behavioral sciences. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4(2), 103-126.
Ashmore, Malcolm; Myers, Greg & Potter, Jonathan (2001). Discourse, rhetoric, reflexivity: Seven days in the library. In Sheila Jasanoff, Gerald E. Markle, James C. Petersen & Trevor Pinch (Eds.), Handbook of science and technology studies (pp.321-342). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Baur, Nina & Knoblauch, Hubert (2018). Die Interpretativität des Quantitativen. Zur Konvergenz von qualitativer und quantitativer empirischer Sozialforschung. Soziologie, 47(4), 439-461.
Bazeley, Patricia (2018). Integrating analyses in mixed methods research. London: Sage.
Bernstein, Jay Hillel (2015). Transdisciplinarity: A review of its origins, development, and current issues. Journal of Research Practice, 11(1), Art. R1, https://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/article/view/510 [Accessed: July 12, 2022].
Berthoin Antal, Ariane & Rogge, Jan-Christoph (2020). Does academia still call? Experiences of academics in Germany and the United States. Minerva, 58(2), 187-210.
Billig, Michael (1988). Ideological dilemmas: A social psychology of everyday thinking. London: Sage.
Boltanski, Luc (2011). On critique: A sociology of emancipation. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Bonacker, Thorsten (2000). Die normative Kraft der Kontingenz: Nichtessentialistische Gesellschaftskritik nach Weber und Adorno. Frankfurt/M.: Campus.
Bourdieu, Pierre (2004 [2001]). Science of science and reflexivity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Bourdieu, Pierre; Chamboredon, Jean-Claude & Passeron, Jean-Claude (1991 [1968]). The craft of sociology: Epistemological preliminaries. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Bresnen, Mike & Burrell, Gibson (2013). Journals à la mode? Twenty years of living alongside Mode 2 and the new production of knowledge. Organization, 20(1), 25-37.
Bryman, Alan (2006). Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: How is it done?. Qualitative Research, 6(1), 97-113.
Bryman, Alan (2007). Barriers to integrating quantitative and qualitative research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 8-22.
Bryman, Alan (2008). The end of the paradigm wars?. In Pertti Alasuutari, Leonard Bickman & Julia Brannen (Eds.), The Sage handbook of social research methods (pp.13-25). London: Sage.
Bryman, Alan; Becker, Saul & Sempik, Joe (2008). Quality criteria for quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods research: A view from social policy. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 11(4), 261-276.
Burzan, Nicole (2016). Methodenplurale Forschung. Chancen und Probleme von Mixed Methods. Weinheim: Beltz Juventa.
Camic, Charles; Gross, Neil & Lamont, Michèle (2011). Introduction: The study of social knowledge making. In Charles Camic, Neil Gross & Michèle Lamont (Eds.), Social knowledge in the making (pp.1-40). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Caracelli, Valerie J. & Greene, Jennifer C. (1997). Defining and describing the paradigm issue in mixed-method evaluation. In Jennifer C. Greene & Valerie J. Caracelli (Eds.), Advances in mixed method evaluation. The challenges and benefits of integrating diverse paradigms (pp.5-17). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Celikates, Robin (2018). Critique as social practice. Critical theory and social self-understanding. London: Rowman & Littlefield.
Creswell, John W. & Plano Clark, Vicki L. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Delfanti, Allessandro (2010). Users and peers. From citizen science to P2P science. Journal of Science Communication, 9(1), 1-5, https://doi.org/10.22323/2.09010501 [Accessed: June 30, 2022].
Denscombe, Martyn (2008). Communities of practice. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 2(3), 270-283.
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Soziologie (2018). Stellungnahme der DGS zur Gründung einer "Akademie für Soziologie", https://soziologie.de/aktuell/news/stellungnahme-der-dgs-zur-gruendung-einer-akademie-fuer-soziologie [Accessed: June 30, 2022].
Esser, Hartmut (2018). Zwei Seelen wohnen, ach! in meiner Brust?: Nicht nur eine "Stellungnahme" aus "gegebenem Anlass". Zeitschrift für Theoretische Soziologie, 1, 132-152.
Fetters, Michael & Molina-Azorin, José (2017). The journal of mixed methods research starts a new decade: Principles for bringing in the new and divesting of the old language of the field. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 11(2), 3-10.
Feyerabend, Paul (2010 [1975]). Against method. London: Verso.
Feyerabend, Paul (2018 [1983]). Wider den Methodenzwang. Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp.
Fielding, Nigel (2014). Qualitative research and our digital futures. Qualitative Inquiry, 20(9), 1064-1073.
Fielding, Nigel & Cisneros-Puebla, César A. (2009). CAQDAS-GIS convergence. Toward a new integrated mixed method research practice?. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 3(4), 349-370.
Fielding, Nigel & Fielding, Jane (1987). Linking data. London: Sage.
Fielding, Nigel & Schreier, Margrit (2001). Introduction: On the compatibility between qualitative and quantitative research methods. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 2(1), Art. 4, https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-2.1.965 [Accessed: July 13, 2022].
Fuchs, Stephan (1992). The professional quest for truth: A social theory of science and knowledge. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Gerdon, Frederic (2018). "Die Akademie wird sich an ihren eigenen Zielen messen lassen": Interview mit dem Vorsitzenden der Akademie für Soziologie. Soziologieblog, May 22, https://soziologieblog.hypotheses.org/11144 [Accessed: June 30, 2022].
Gilbert, Nigel G. & Mulkay, Michael (1984). Opening Pandora's box. A sociological analysis of scientists' discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gobo, Giampietro (2023). Mixed methods and their pragmatic approach: Is there a risk of being entangled in a positivist epistemology and methodology? Limits, pitfalls and consequences of a bricolage methodology. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 24(1), Art. 13, https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-24.1.4005.
Goertz, Gary & Mahoney, James (2013). A tale of two cultures: Qualitative and quantitative research in the social sciences. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Greene, Jennifer C. (2007). Mixed methods in social inquiry. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Guetterman, Timothy C.; Fetters, Michael D. & Creswell, John W. (2015). Integrating quantitative and qualitative results in health science mixed methods research through joint displays. Annals of Family Medicine, 13(6), 554-561, https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.1865 [Accessed: June 30, 2022].
Guetzkow, Joshua; Lamont, Michèle & Mallard, Grégoire (2004). What is originality in the humanities and the social sciences?. American Sociological Review, 69(2), 190-212.
Habermas, Jürgen (1984). Überlegungen zur Kommunikationspathologie. In Jürgen Habermas, Vorstudien und Ergänzungen zur Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns (pp.226-270). Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp.
Hammersley, Martyn (2002). The relationship between qualitative and quantitative research: Paradigm loyalty versus methodological eclecticism. In John Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of qualitative research methods for psychology and the social sciences (pp.159-174). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Hammersley, Martyn (2023). Are there assessment criteria for qualitative findings? A challenge facing mixed methods research. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 24(1), Art. 1, http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/fqs-24.1.3935.
Hesse-Biber, Sharlene (2015). Introduction: Navigating a turbulent research landscape: Working the boundaries, tensions, diversity, and contradictions of multimethod and mixed methods inquiry. In Sharlene Hesse-Biber & R. Burke Johnson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of multimethod and mixed methods research inquiry (pp.xxxiii-liii). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Hirschauer, Stefan (2021). Ungehaltene Dialoge: Zur Fortentwicklung soziologischer Intradisziplinarität. Soziologie, 50(1), 46-65.
Hollstein, Betina & Wagemann, Claudius (2014). Fuzzy-set analysis of network data as mixed method: Personal networks and the transition from school to work. In Silvia Domínguez & Betina Hollstein (Eds.), Mixed methods social networks research. Design and applications (pp.237-268). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Howe, Kenneth R. (2004). A critique of experimentalism. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(1), 42-61.
Howell Smith, Michelle C. & Shanahan Bazis, Pamela (2021). Conducting mixed methods research systematic methodological reviews: A review of practice and recommendations. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 15(4), 546-566.
Hunter, Albert (1990). Introduction: Rhetoric in research, networks of knowledge. In Albert Hunter (Ed.), The rhetoric of social research understood and believed (pp.1-22). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Hutchinson, Susan R. & Lovell, Cheryl D. (2004). A review of methodological characteristics of research published in key journals in higher education: Implications for graduate research training. Research in Higher Education, 45(4), 383-403.
Ivankova, Nataliya & Wingo, Nancy (2018). Applying mixed methods in action research: Methodological potentials and advantages. American Behavioral Scientist, 62(7), 978-997.
Johnson, R. Burke (2017). Dialectical pluralism: A metaparadigm whose time has come. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 11(2), 156-173.
Johnson, R. Burke & Onwuegbuzie, Anthony J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14-26.
Kansteiner, Katja & König, Stefan (2020). The role(s) of qualitative content analysis in mixed methods research designs. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 21(1), Art. 11, http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/fqs-21.1.3412 [Accessed: June 30, 2022].
Kaplan, Abraham (2017 [1964]). The conduct of inquiry: Methodology for behavioral science. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Kelle, Udo (2001). Sociological explanations between micro and macro and the integration of qualitative and quantitative methods. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 2(1), Art. 5, https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-2.1.966 [Accessed: June 30, 2022].
Kelle, Udo (2007). Die Integration qualitativer und quantitativer Methoden in der empirischen Sozialforschung: Theoretische Grundlagen und methodologische Konzepte. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Knapp, Corrine Nöel; Reid, Robin S.; Fernández-Giménez, María E.; Klein, Julia A. & Galvin, Kathleen A. (2019). Placing transdisciplinarity in context: A review of approaches to connect scholars, society and action. Sustainability, 11(18), Art. 4899, https://doi.org/10.3390/su11184899 [Accessed: July 12, 2022].
Knappertsbusch, Felix (2020). ''Fractal heuristics'' for mixed methods research: Applying Abbott's ''fractal distinctions'' as a conceptual metaphor for method integration. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 14(4), 456-472.
Knappertsbusch, Felix (2021). Mixed Methods und Multimethod Research – Ideologiekritik und methodenintegrative Forschung. In Heiko Beyer & Alexandra Schauer (Eds.), Die Rückkehr der Ideologie. Zur Gegenwart eines Schlüsselbegriffs (pp.171-209). Frankfurt/M.: Campus.
Knoblauch, Hubert (2018). Von der reflexiven Methodologie zur empirischen Wissenschaftstheorie. In Leila Akremi, Boris Traue, Hubert Knoblauch & Nina Baur (Eds.), Grundlagentexte Methoden. Handbuch interpretativ forschen (pp.226-244). Weinheim: Beltz Juventa.
Knoblauch, Hubert (2021). Reflexive methodology and the empirical theory of science. Historical Social Research, 46(2), 59-79, https://doi.org/10.12759/hsr.46.2021.2.59-79 [Accessed: June 30, 2022].
Knorr-Cetina, Karin (1981). The manufacture of knowledge: An essay on the constructivist and contextual nature of science. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Kornmesser, Stephan & Schurz, Gerhard (2014). Die multiparadigmatische Struktur der Wissenschaften: Einleitung und Übersicht. In Stephan Kornmesser & Gerhard Schurz (Eds.), Die multiparadigmatische Struktur der Wissenschaften (pp.11-46). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.
Krohn, Wolfgang & Küppers, Günter (1989). Die Selbstorganisation der Wissenschaft. Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp.
Kuhn, Thomas S. (1977). The essential tension: Tradition and innovation in scientific research. In Thomas S. Kuhn, The essential tension. Selected studies in scientific tradition and change (pp.225-238). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Kuhn, Thomas S. (1990). The road since structure. Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, 2, 3-13.
Kuhn, Thomas S. (2012 [1962]). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Latour, Bruno (2004). Why has critique run out of steam? From matters of fact to matters of concern. Critical Inquiry, 30(2), 225-248.
Latour, Bruno (2006). Von der "wissenschaftlichen Wahrheit" zur Kartographie der Kontroversen. In Wolf-Andreas Liebert & Marc-Denis Weitze (Eds.), Kontroversen als Schlüssel zur Wissenschaft? Wissenskulturen in sprachlicher Interaktion (pp.195-202). Bielefeld: transcript.
Laudan, Larry (1983). The demise of the demarcation problem. In Robert S. Cohen & Larry Laudan (Eds.), Physics, philosophy and psychoanalysis. Essays in honour of Adolf Grünbaum (pp.111-127). Dordrecht: Springer.
Laudel, Grit (2006). The art of getting funded: How scientists adapt to their funding conditions. Science and Public Policy, 33(7), 489-504.
Leahey, Erin (2008). Methodological memes and mores: Toward a sociology of social research. Annual Review of Sociology, 34(1), 33-53.
Marguin, Séverine (2021). On the entanglement between sociology and architecture in spatial research. Dimensions of Architectural Knowledge, 1(1), 209-220, https://doi.org/10.14361/dak-2021-0127 [Accessed: June 30, 2022].
Martin, Peter (2013). Racism, differentialism, and antiracism in everyday ideology: A mixed-methods study in Britain. International Journal of Conflict and Violence, 7(1), 57-73, https://www.ijcv.org/index.php/ijcv/article/view/2956 [Accessed: June 30, 2022].
Mason, Jennifer (2006). Mixing methods in a qualitatively driven way. Qualitative Research, 6(1), 9-25.
Maton, Karl (2003). Reflexivity, relationism, & research. Space and Culture, 6(1), 52-65.
Mau, Steffen & Villa, Paula-Irene (2018). Von angeblich alternativlosen und alternativen Fakten: Angriffe auf die Wissenschaft und wie die Soziologie damit umgehen könnte. Soziologie, 47(3), 273-283.
Maxwell, Joseph A. (2011). Paradigms or toolkits? Philosophical and methodological positions as heuristics for mixed methods research. Mid-Western Educational Researcher, 24(2), 25-30.
Mertens, Donna M. (2010). Transformative mixed methods research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(6), 469-474.
Merton, Robert K. (1973). The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations. Carbondale, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Merton, Robert K. & Barber, Elinor (1976). Sociological ambivalence. In Robert Merton, Sociological ambivalence and other essays (pp.3-30). New York, NY: The Free Press.
Mruck, Katja & Breuer, Franz (2003). Subjectivity and reflexivity in qualitative research—The FQS issues. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 4(2), Art. 23, https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-4.2.696 [Accessed: June 30, 2022].
Niglas, Katrin (2004). The combined use of qualitative and quantitative methods in educational research. Dissertation, educational science, Tallinn Paedagogical University, Estonia, https://www.digar.ee/arhiiv/en/download/193063 [Accessed: June 30, 2022].
Norkus, Maria; Besio, Cristina & Baur, Nina (2016). Effects of project-based research work on the career paths of young academics. Work Organisation, Labour & Globalisation, 10(2), 9-26, https://doi.org/10.13169/workorgalaboglob.10.2.0009 [Accessed: June 30, 2022].
Noy, Chaim (2003). The rites of passage: Reflections on writing a dissertation in narrative methodology. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 4(2), Art. 39, https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-4.2.712 [Accessed: June 30, 2022].
O'Cathain, Alicia; Murphy, Elizabeth & Nicholl, Jon (2007). Why, and how, mixed methods research is undertaken in health services research in England: A mixed methods study. BMC Health Services Research, 7, Art. 85, https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-7-85 [Accessed: June 30, 2022].
O'Cathain, Alicia; Nicholl, Jon & Murphy, Elizabeth (2009). Structural issues affecting mixed methods studies in health research: A qualitative study. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 9, Art. 82, https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-9-82 [Accessed: June 30, 2022].
Onwuegbuzie, Anthony J. & Hitchcock, John H. (2015). Advanced mixed analysis approaches. In Sharlene Hesse-Biber & R. Burke Johnson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of multimethod and mixed methods research inquiry (pp.275-294). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Payne, Geoff; Williams, Malcolm & Chamberlain, Suzanne (2004). Methodological pluralism in British sociology. Sociology, 38(1), 153-163.
Pickering, Andrew (1992). From science as knowledge to science as practice. In Andrew Pickering (Ed.), Science as practice and culture (pp.1-27). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Reichardt, Charles S. & Cook, Thomas D. (1979). Beyond qualitative versus quantitative methods. In Thomas D. Cook & Charles S. Reichardt (Eds.), Qualitative and quantitative methods in evaluation research (pp.7-32). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Römer, Oliver (2019). Wissenschaftslogik und Widerspruch: Die Esser-Hirschauer-Kontroverse. Soziologiehistorische und systematische Überlegungen zu einem "Methodenstreit". Zeitschrift für Theoretische Soziologie, 2, 220-244.
Rudolfi, Markus (2017). Interview mit Prof. Dr. Thomas Scheffer – Für eine multiparadigmatische Soziologie in Forschung und Lehre. Soziologieblog, December 21, https://soziologieblog.hypotheses.org/10920 [Accessed: June 30, 2022].
Sandelowski, Margarete (2003). Tables or tableaux? The challenges of writing and reading mixed methods studies. In Abbas Tashakkori & Charles Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp.321-350). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Savage, Mike (2016). Epilogue: From the "coming crisis" to the "green shoots of recovery"?. In Linda McKie & Louise Ryan (Eds.), An end to the crisis of empirical sociology? Trends and challenges in social research (pp.187-195). London: Routledge.
Schmitz, Andreas; Schmidt-Wellenburg, Christian; Witte, Daniel & Keil, Maria (2019). In welcher Gesellschaft forschen wir eigentlich?: Struktur und Dynamik des Feldes der deutschen Soziologie. Zeitschrift für Theoretische Soziologie, 2, 245-276.
Schoonenboom, Judith (2023). The fundamental difference between qualitative and quantitative data in mixed methods research. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 24(1), Art. 11, https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-24.1.3986.
Schreier, Margrit (2012). Qualitative content analysis in practice. London: Sage.
Schuetze, Hans G. (2007). Research universities and the spectre of academic capitalism. Minerva, 45(4), 435-443.
Serrano Velarde, Kathia (2018). The way we ask for money ... The emergence and institutionalization of grant writing practices in academia. Minerva, 56(1), 85-107.
Sheehan, Michael D. & Johnson, R. Burke (2012). Philosophical and methodological beliefs of instructional design faculty and professionals. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60(1), 131-153.
Strübing, Jörg (2017). Was für eine Wissenschaft soll die Soziologie sein?. Soziologieblog, November 27, https://blog.soziologie.de/2017/11/was-fuer-eine-wissenschaft-soll-die-soziologie-sein/ [Accessed: June 30, 2022].
Symonds, Jennifer & Gorard, Stephen (2010). Death of mixed methods? Or the rebirth of research as a craft. Evaluation and Research in Education, 23(2), 121-136.
Teddlie, Charles & Tashakkori, Abbas (2020). Foundations of mixed methods research. Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Truscott, Diane M.; Swars, Susan; Smith, Stephanie; Thornton‐Reid, Flo; Zhao, Yali; Dooley, Caitlin; Williams, Brian; Hart, Lynn & Matthews, Mona (2010). A cross‐disciplinary examination of the prevalence of mixed methods in educational research 1995-2005. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 13(4), 317-328.
Twinn, Sheila (2003). Status of mixed methods in nursing. In Abbas Tashakkori & Charles Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp.541-556). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Welsch, Wolfgang (1994). Wege aus der Moderne: Schlüsseltexte der Postmoderne-Diskussion. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
Wendel, Hans J. (2013). Das Abgrenzungsproblem. In Herbert Keuth (Ed.), Karl Popper: Logik der Forschung (pp.41-65). Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
Wetherell, Margaret (2012). The prejudice problematic. In John Dixon & Mark Levine (Eds.), Beyond prejudice. Extending the social psychology of conflict, inequality and social change (pp.158-178). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Whitley, Richard (2000). The intellectual and social organization of the sciences. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Whitley, Richard; Gläser, Jochen & Laudel, Grit (2018). The impact of changing funding and authority relationships on scientific innovations. Minerva, 56(1), 109-134.
Williams, Malcolm; Sloan, Luke & Brookfield, Charlotte (2017). A tale of two sociologies: Analyzing versus critique in UK sociology. Sociological Research Online, 22(4), 132-151.
Wimmer, Christopher & Schneickert, Christian (2018). Konflikt, Autonomie und Orthodoxie: Professor*innen im sozialen Feld der Soziologie in Deutschland. Soziale Welt, 69(2), 182-210.
Winch, Peter (2003 [1985]). The idea of a social science and its relation to philosophy. London: Routledge.
Wisdom, Jennifer P.; Cavaleri, Mary A.; Onwuegbuzie, Anthony J. & Green, Carla A. (2012). Methodological reporting in qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods health services research articles. Health Services Research, 47(2), 721-745.
Woiwode, Hendrik & Froese, Anna (2021). Two hearts beating in a research centers' chest: how scholars in interdisciplinary research settings cope with monodisciplinary deep structures. Studies in Higher Education, 46(11), 2230-2244, https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2020.1716321 [Accessed: June 30, 2022].
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Felix Knappertsbusch
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
