Has Funding Made a Difference to Research Methods?

Author:

Platt Jennifer1

Affiliation:

1. University of Sussex, UK

Abstract

It has been argued that foundation funding has distorted methods in American sociology in the direction of quantification. This argument rests on a number of assumptions, of which the key one is that in the absence of such funding, method would have developed differently. Data on the methods of funded and unfunded research articles are analysed, and show that the trend to increasing levels of quantification is almost equally present in unfunded work, which suggests that funding should not be held responsible for the trend.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Sociology and Political Science

Cited by 5 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Social science and Sozialwissenschaft: Categorical and institutional boundaries of knowledge;Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences;2018-05-16

2. Funding of Social Science, History of;International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences;2015

3. L’analyse qualitative informatisée : logique des puces et quête de sens;Recherches qualitatives;2000

4. Realtime Interviewing Using the World Wide Web;Sociological Research Online;1999-09

5. Theory Building in Qualitative Research and Computer Programs for the Management of Textual Data;Sociological Research Online;1997-06

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3