{"title":"Special Issue on Qualitive Methods for Theory Building in HRD: Why Now?","authors":"Yonjoo Cho","doi":"10.1177/15344843221146358","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Over time, qualitative methods have changed, sometimes rapidly, other times slowly. Qualitative research had to edge its way into academia and is still earning its place. Initially, ethnography was prioritized because in an era of quantitative inquiry, anthropology was shamelessly qualitative and led by describing ethnographic methods from the late 19th century. Over the decades, we expanded from ethnography to grounded theory— and both methods have since matured into several “styles” or types. Many methods have emerged and been popularized, for instance, phenomenology, focus groups, semi-structured interviews, digital methods, and now, mixed and multiple methods that incorporate some form of qualitative inquiry. We have seen disciplinary support for conversational analysis, discourse analysis, and narrative analysis. Some methods have held their own perspective, but in others, shifts have occurred. Participant observation is now incorporating photovoice and video data. We have moved from using perspectives of strangers that interpret the experiences of others from the outside, to centering on the use of self as data, as in autoethnography. As a result, we use participants as equal partners in research, as in community-based participatory research.","PeriodicalId":51474,"journal":{"name":"Human Resource Development Review","volume":"22 1","pages":"3 - 6"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Resource Development Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15344843221146358","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Over time, qualitative methods have changed, sometimes rapidly, other times slowly. Qualitative research had to edge its way into academia and is still earning its place. Initially, ethnography was prioritized because in an era of quantitative inquiry, anthropology was shamelessly qualitative and led by describing ethnographic methods from the late 19th century. Over the decades, we expanded from ethnography to grounded theory— and both methods have since matured into several “styles” or types. Many methods have emerged and been popularized, for instance, phenomenology, focus groups, semi-structured interviews, digital methods, and now, mixed and multiple methods that incorporate some form of qualitative inquiry. We have seen disciplinary support for conversational analysis, discourse analysis, and narrative analysis. Some methods have held their own perspective, but in others, shifts have occurred. Participant observation is now incorporating photovoice and video data. We have moved from using perspectives of strangers that interpret the experiences of others from the outside, to centering on the use of self as data, as in autoethnography. As a result, we use participants as equal partners in research, as in community-based participatory research.
期刊介绍:
As described elsewhere, Human Resource Development Review is a theory development journal for scholars of human resource development and related disciplines. Human Resource Development Review publishes articles that make theoretical contributions on theory development, foundations of HRD, theory building methods, and integrative reviews of the relevant literature. Papers whose central focus is empirical findings, including empirical method and design are not considered for publication in Human Resource Development Review. This journal encourages submissions that provide new theoretical insights to advance our understanding of human resource development and related disciplines. Such papers may include syntheses of existing bodies of theory, new substantive theories, exploratory conceptual models, taxonomies and typology developed as foundations for theory, treatises in formal theory construction, papers on the history of theory, critique of theory that includes alternative research propositions, metatheory, and integrative literature reviews with strong theoretical implications. Papers addressing foundations of HRD might address philosophies of HRD, historical foundations, definitions of the field, conceptual organization of the field, and ethical foundations. Human Resource Development Review takes a multi-paradigm view of theory building so submissions from different paradigms are encouraged.