contextualization, authority, communication. some remarks on the fqs debate "quality of qualitative research

Clicks: 220
ID: 214823
2001
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #532 of 729 articles by views in molecules

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 729 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
The contexts, modes and forms of the production of scientific knowledge are getting more and more pluralistic and heteronomous ("heteronomization of scientific knowledge"). It's on this base we are discussing here the qualities of qualitative social research. The variety and multitude of social terms of the production of scientific knowledge are taken into account. Therefore, quality means more than validity. Quality is a broader concept that refers to a variety of configurations of conditions and criteria of the research project as well as the research process. URN: urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs010223
Reference Key
kiener2001forum:contextualization, Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors ;Urs Kiener;Michael Schanne
Journal molecules
Year 2001
DOI
DOI not found
URL
http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/962
Keywords
quality assessment knowledge production

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.