...
首页> 外文期刊>Psychology of sport and exercise >A quality debate on grounded theory in sport and exercise psychology? A commentary on potential areas for future debate
【24h】

A quality debate on grounded theory in sport and exercise psychology? A commentary on potential areas for future debate

机译:关于运动和运动心理学的扎根理论的质量辩论?对未来辩论的潜在领域的评论

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Objectives: The objective of this commentary on my own (Weed, 2009a) and Holt and Tamminen's (2010) recent contributions on the use of grounded theory in sport and exercise psychology is to identify those areas in which there is debate, and those where there is agreement, and to suggest the key areas on which future debate might most productively and usefully focus. Methods: The two contributions are discussed to examine their contribution to a quality debate on grounded theory: both a debate about the quality of grounded theory research, and a debate of high quality on grounded theory. Results: While there is some disagreement between Holt and Tamminen (2010) and myself (Weed, 2009a) on the appropriateness of search strategies used to identify grounded theory research in sport and exercise psychology, and on the extent to which an attempt is being made to police or correct methods, on the more substantive issues relating to micro-level research quality considerations for grounded theory in sport and exercise psychology there appears to be little on which there is substantive debate or disagreement. However, there appears to be much greater scope for productive debate on macro-level considerations relating to the ontological and epistemological underpinnings of variants of grounded theory, and their implications for research quality. This is clear from the wider grounded theory literature, but these important aspects of a high quality debate on grounded theory have not yet been extensively addressed in sport and exercise psychology. Conclusion: While there is little substantive disagreement about issues of micro-level research quality considerations for grounded theory in sport and exercise psychology, a high quality debate in the future must recognise that micro-level research quality is inextricably linked with quality concerns for grounded theory in sport and exercise psychology at the macro-level.
机译:目标:本评论(我自己,Weed,2009a)和Holt and Tamminen(2010)最近关于在体育和运动心理学中使用扎根理论的贡献的目的是确定哪些领域存在争议,哪些领域存在争议达成共识,并提出未来辩论可能最有成效和有用的重点领域。方法:讨论这两个贡献,以检查它们对扎根理论质量辩论的贡献:关于扎根理论研究质量的辩论和关于扎根理论的高质量辩论。结果:尽管Holt和Tamminen(2010)与我(Weed,2009a)在用于确定运动和运动心理学基础理论研究的搜索策略的适当性以及尝试程度方面存在分歧。对于警察或正确的方法而言,在与体育和运动心理学扎根理论有关的微观研究质量考虑有关的更实质性问题上,几乎没有实质性辩论或意见分歧。然而,关于扎根理论变体的本体论和认识论基础的宏观层面的考虑及其对研究质量的影响,似乎有更大的辩论空间。从更广泛的扎根理论文献中可以明显看出这一点,但是关于扎根理论的高质量辩论的这些重要方面尚未在运动和锻炼心理学中得到广泛解决。结论:尽管在运动心理学和运动心理学上对微观理论研究质量考虑的问题几乎没有实质性分歧,但未来的高质量辩论必须认识到微观理论研究质量与理论基础的质量关注息息相关在宏观运动和运动心理学领域。

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