Validity issues in narrative research

被引：376

作者：

Polkinghorne, Donald E. ^{[1
]}

机构：

[1] Univ So Calif, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA

来源：

QUALITATIVE INQUIRY | 2007年 / 13卷 / 04期

关键词：

interpretation; narrative; research; validity;

D O I：

10.1177/1077800406297670

中图分类号：

C [社会科学总论];

学科分类号：

03 ; 0303 ;

摘要：

Attention to the judgments about the validity of research-generated knowledge claims is integral to all social science research. During the past several decades, knowledge development has been split into two communities: conventional researchers and reformist researchers. Narrative research is positioned within the reformist community. The two communities use different kinds of data and employ different analytic processes. In both communities, researchers develop arguments to convince readers of the validity of their knowledge claims. Both need to respond to threats to validity inherent in their designs. The threats particular to narrative research relate to two areas: the differences in people's experienced meaning and the stories they tell about this meaning and the connections between storied texts and the interpretations of those texts.

引用

页码：471 / 486

页数：16

共 25 条

[11]

*MICROSOFT, 2003, ENCARTA REF LIB 2003

[12]

Mishler E., 1986, RES INTERVIEWING CON

[13]

Murphy GL., 2002, BIG BOOK CONCEPTS, DOI [10.7551/mitpress/1602.001.0001, DOI 10.7551/MITPRESS/1602.001.0001]

[14]

Patton MQ., 2002, QUALITATIVE RES EVAL, V3, DOI DOI 10.1002/NUR.4770140111

[15]

PERELMAN C, 1982, RELAM RHETORIC

[16]

Polkinghorne D., 1983, METHODOLOGY HUMAN SC

[17]

Ricoeur Paul., 1984, TIME NARRATIVE, V1

[18]

Rosch E., 1978, COGNITION CATEGORIZA, P27, DOI DOI 10.1016/B978-1-4832-1446-7.50028-5

[19]

Schwandt T.D., 2000, HDB QUALITATIVE RES, V2nd, P189, DOI DOI 10.2989/JCAMH.2008.20.1.5.490

[20]

Seidman I., 2006, INTERVIEWING QUALITA

← 1 2 3 →