第12章“镜中奇遇”:论组织学术中的虚幻故事、扭曲和反身性

B. Gray
{"title":"第12章“镜中奇遇”:论组织学术中的虚幻故事、扭曲和反身性","authors":"B. Gray","doi":"10.1108/S0733-558X20190000059013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter asks: ‘How often do we as social scientists question the validity of our theories and our findings? How often do we reflexively examine the distortions in the lenses we use to analyse organizations? ‘It proceeds to answer these questions by defining reflexivity and presenting six perspectives on reflexive analysis that build on and extend previous analytical treatments of reflexivity, especially that by Alvesson, Hardy, and Harley (2008). Illustrations of the six are drawn from my own experiences as well as those of other scholars. The intention is to stimulate greater interest in reflexivity and provoke other scholars to look more reflexively at their own work.","PeriodicalId":198270,"journal":{"name":"The Production of Managerial Knowledge and Organizational Theory: New Approaches to Writing, Producing and Consuming Theory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Chapter 12 ‘Through the Looking Glass’: on Phantasmal Tales, Distortions and Reflexivity in Organizational Scholarship\",\"authors\":\"B. Gray\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/S0733-558X20190000059013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This chapter asks: ‘How often do we as social scientists question the validity of our theories and our findings? How often do we reflexively examine the distortions in the lenses we use to analyse organizations? ‘It proceeds to answer these questions by defining reflexivity and presenting six perspectives on reflexive analysis that build on and extend previous analytical treatments of reflexivity, especially that by Alvesson, Hardy, and Harley (2008). Illustrations of the six are drawn from my own experiences as well as those of other scholars. The intention is to stimulate greater interest in reflexivity and provoke other scholars to look more reflexively at their own work.\",\"PeriodicalId\":198270,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Production of Managerial Knowledge and Organizational Theory: New Approaches to Writing, Producing and Consuming Theory\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-04-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Production of Managerial Knowledge and Organizational Theory: New Approaches to Writing, Producing and Consuming Theory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/S0733-558X20190000059013\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Production of Managerial Knowledge and Organizational Theory: New Approaches to Writing, Producing and Consuming Theory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/S0733-558X20190000059013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

这一章的问题是:“作为社会科学家,我们多久会质疑我们的理论和发现的有效性?”我们有多少次会反射性地检查我们用来分析组织的镜头中的扭曲?它通过定义反身性,并提出六个关于反身性分析的观点来回答这些问题,这些观点建立在和扩展了以前对反身性的分析处理之上,特别是由Alvesson, Hardy和Harley(2008)提出的。这六种方法的例证来自我自己的经历以及其他学者的经历。其目的是激发人们对反身性的更大兴趣,并促使其他学者以更多的反身性来看待自己的工作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Chapter 12 ‘Through the Looking Glass’: on Phantasmal Tales, Distortions and Reflexivity in Organizational Scholarship
This chapter asks: ‘How often do we as social scientists question the validity of our theories and our findings? How often do we reflexively examine the distortions in the lenses we use to analyse organizations? ‘It proceeds to answer these questions by defining reflexivity and presenting six perspectives on reflexive analysis that build on and extend previous analytical treatments of reflexivity, especially that by Alvesson, Hardy, and Harley (2008). Illustrations of the six are drawn from my own experiences as well as those of other scholars. The intention is to stimulate greater interest in reflexivity and provoke other scholars to look more reflexively at their own work.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Chapter 9 Visual Artefacts as Tools for Analysis and Theorizing Chapter 5 Peer Review and the Production of Scholarly Knowledge: Automated Textual Analysis of Manuscripts Revised for Publication in Administrative Science Quarterly Chapter 10 Presenting Findings from Qualitative Research: One Size Does Not Fit All! Chapter 11 For Social Reflexivity in Organization and Management Theory Chapter 8 When Fieldwork Hurts: On the Lived Experience of Conducting Research in Unsettling Contexts
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1