首页> 外文会议>Organizational transformation: opportunities and challenges >A COMPARISON OF THE CANONS OF SCIENCE USED INPOSITIVISTIC RESEARCH AND CONSTRUCTIVIST/NATURALISTICRESEARCH
【24h】

A COMPARISON OF THE CANONS OF SCIENCE USED INPOSITIVISTIC RESEARCH AND CONSTRUCTIVIST/NATURALISTICRESEARCH

机译:准定性研究和建构主义/自然主义研究的科学原理比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

In this paper, the canons of science which are crucialrnfor positivistic, empirical research andrnconstructivistaturalistic research will be identified,rndescribed, compared and discussed. Although therernare common canons which are often used in papersrnthroughout literature, it would be beneficial to set arncommon ground for the identification and use of therncanons. The canons used in positivistic researchrnwill differ from the canons used inrnconstructivistaturalistic research. This paper willrnanalyze major publications (papers, books, etc.)rnexploring the canons either directly or indirectly, andrnwill provide a link between major characteristics ofrntwo different research philosophies and the relatedrncanons that should be taken into consideration whenrnsetting a research design.
机译:本文将确定,描述,比较和讨论对于实证主义,实证研究和建构主义/自然主义研究至关重要的科学经典。尽管存在贯穿整个文献的论文中常用的经典规范,但为鉴定和使用经典规范奠定基础是有益的。实证研究中使用的规范与建构主义/自然主义研究中使用的规范不同。本文将对主要出版物(论文,书籍等)进行直接或间接的分析,并将提供两种不同研究哲学的主要特征与相关研究规范之间的联系,在制定研究设计时应予以考虑。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号