创造力:数量与质量之间社会研究的方法论维度

IF 0.3 Q3 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Revista Latinoamericana de Metodologia de las Ciencias Sociales Pub Date : 2019-06-24 DOI:10.24215/18537863E049
F. Sacchetti
{"title":"创造力:数量与质量之间社会研究的方法论维度","authors":"F. Sacchetti","doi":"10.24215/18537863E049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this work I address creativity in the process of social sciences research, comparing quantitative and qualitative approaches. In discussing creativity I go back to Chomsky and his distinction between rule-governed and rule-changing creativity. In my analysis I suggest that the quantitative approach is characterized by rule-governed creativity, the qualitative one by rule-changing creativity: these are two models of creativity that the Chomskian vision links to a set of rules. Thus in the first case the creation of the tools by which the researcher collects information is submitted to a set of rules related to substantial and procedural competences. In the second case the creative phase does not have a place in the creation of a tool, but rather in a performance. The idea of performance as a constitutive part in qualitative research is analysed on a substantial basis, revealing the implications of distinct creative processes under different methodological choices. Whilst a quantitative approach requires using procedural and substantial competences, I suggest that in a qualitative enquiry the researcher’s fieldwork is considered as a ‘performance’ because of its adaptive character. The researcher is constantly confronted with unforeseen situations, surrounded by an unknown environment. Also, this use of the notion of ‘performance’ comprehends both elements of the process as well as of the outcome of fieldwork, as it recalls peculiar characteristics of qualitative work: action and interaction, personal involvement and, above all, orientation to a purpose (in this context, the teleological purpose of knowledge production).","PeriodicalId":40880,"journal":{"name":"Revista Latinoamericana de Metodologia de las Ciencias Sociales","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Creativity as a Methodological dimension of Social Research between Quantity and Quality\",\"authors\":\"F. Sacchetti\",\"doi\":\"10.24215/18537863E049\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this work I address creativity in the process of social sciences research, comparing quantitative and qualitative approaches. In discussing creativity I go back to Chomsky and his distinction between rule-governed and rule-changing creativity. In my analysis I suggest that the quantitative approach is characterized by rule-governed creativity, the qualitative one by rule-changing creativity: these are two models of creativity that the Chomskian vision links to a set of rules. Thus in the first case the creation of the tools by which the researcher collects information is submitted to a set of rules related to substantial and procedural competences. In the second case the creative phase does not have a place in the creation of a tool, but rather in a performance. The idea of performance as a constitutive part in qualitative research is analysed on a substantial basis, revealing the implications of distinct creative processes under different methodological choices. Whilst a quantitative approach requires using procedural and substantial competences, I suggest that in a qualitative enquiry the researcher’s fieldwork is considered as a ‘performance’ because of its adaptive character. The researcher is constantly confronted with unforeseen situations, surrounded by an unknown environment. Also, this use of the notion of ‘performance’ comprehends both elements of the process as well as of the outcome of fieldwork, as it recalls peculiar characteristics of qualitative work: action and interaction, personal involvement and, above all, orientation to a purpose (in this context, the teleological purpose of knowledge production).\",\"PeriodicalId\":40880,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista Latinoamericana de Metodologia de las Ciencias Sociales\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-06-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista Latinoamericana de Metodologia de las Ciencias Sociales\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.24215/18537863E049\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Latinoamericana de Metodologia de las Ciencias Sociales","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24215/18537863E049","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在这项工作中,我解决了社会科学研究过程中的创造力,比较了定量和定性方法。在讨论创造力时,我要回到乔姆斯基,以及他对规则支配的创造力和改变规则的创造力的区分。在我的分析中,我认为定量方法的特点是受规则支配的创造力,定性方法的特点是改变规则的创造力:这是乔姆斯基的观点与一套规则联系在一起的两种创造力模式。因此,在第一种情况下,研究人员收集信息的工具的创建被提交给一套与实质性和程序性能力相关的规则。在第二种情况下,创造阶段并不存在于工具的创造中,而是存在于表演中。作为定性研究的组成部分,性能的概念在实质性的基础上进行了分析,揭示了在不同的方法选择下不同的创作过程的含义。虽然定量方法需要使用程序性和实质性的能力,但我建议在定性调查中,研究人员的实地工作被认为是一种“表现”,因为它具有适应性。研究人员经常面临不可预见的情况,周围是未知的环境。此外,“绩效”概念的这种使用理解了实地工作的过程和结果的两个要素,因为它回顾了定性工作的特殊特征:行动和互动,个人参与,最重要的是,目的取向(在这种情况下,知识生产的目的论目的)。
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
Creativity as a Methodological dimension of Social Research between Quantity and Quality
In this work I address creativity in the process of social sciences research, comparing quantitative and qualitative approaches. In discussing creativity I go back to Chomsky and his distinction between rule-governed and rule-changing creativity. In my analysis I suggest that the quantitative approach is characterized by rule-governed creativity, the qualitative one by rule-changing creativity: these are two models of creativity that the Chomskian vision links to a set of rules. Thus in the first case the creation of the tools by which the researcher collects information is submitted to a set of rules related to substantial and procedural competences. In the second case the creative phase does not have a place in the creation of a tool, but rather in a performance. The idea of performance as a constitutive part in qualitative research is analysed on a substantial basis, revealing the implications of distinct creative processes under different methodological choices. Whilst a quantitative approach requires using procedural and substantial competences, I suggest that in a qualitative enquiry the researcher’s fieldwork is considered as a ‘performance’ because of its adaptive character. The researcher is constantly confronted with unforeseen situations, surrounded by an unknown environment. Also, this use of the notion of ‘performance’ comprehends both elements of the process as well as of the outcome of fieldwork, as it recalls peculiar characteristics of qualitative work: action and interaction, personal involvement and, above all, orientation to a purpose (in this context, the teleological purpose of knowledge production).
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
10
审稿时长
45 weeks
期刊最新文献
Cuerpos, silencios y escucha: reflexiones teórico-metodológicas sobre la investigación de la masacre en Colombia Las contribuciones de la perspectiva Bourdieana a la investigación del trabajo infantil en Argentina Metodología y tecnología en el análisis de noticias sobre vacunación contra el COVID De Comte a Bourdieu, en contra de la unidad de método: los derroteros de la epistemología histórica francesa Procesos de hormonización de personas trans y travestis: notas metodológicas sobre el uso de las entrevistas online
×
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