扎根理论方法论在国际关系研究中的适用性

Q3 Business, Management and Accounting Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods Pub Date : 2022-06-30 DOI:10.34190/ejbrm.20.2.2246
Faies Jafar
{"title":"扎根理论方法论在国际关系研究中的适用性","authors":"Faies Jafar","doi":"10.34190/ejbrm.20.2.2246","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: Engaging the Grounded Theory Methodology (GTM) in International Relation (IR) studies can be a challenging choice for researchers and Ph.D. students. Considering that scholars in the IR field are familiar with certain traditional methodologies, the notion of importing a relatively unique approach such as the GTM can attract strong ontological and epistemological questions. In this article, I contend that pragmatist and constructivist versions of GTM can be a successful research methodology in IR qualitative research. Such choice, however, is constrained by a set of conditions. Guided by existing literature, these conditions were identified and discussed in the context of IR qualitative research norms and then applied in Foreign Policy (FP) decision-making process, a well-known approach in studying FP as a subdiscipline in IR. The article concludes that despite certain limitations, the methodology can be an outstanding option for IR qualitative research. \n ","PeriodicalId":38532,"journal":{"name":"Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Applicability of Grounded Theory Methodology in International Relations Studies\",\"authors\":\"Faies Jafar\",\"doi\":\"10.34190/ejbrm.20.2.2246\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract: Engaging the Grounded Theory Methodology (GTM) in International Relation (IR) studies can be a challenging choice for researchers and Ph.D. students. Considering that scholars in the IR field are familiar with certain traditional methodologies, the notion of importing a relatively unique approach such as the GTM can attract strong ontological and epistemological questions. In this article, I contend that pragmatist and constructivist versions of GTM can be a successful research methodology in IR qualitative research. Such choice, however, is constrained by a set of conditions. Guided by existing literature, these conditions were identified and discussed in the context of IR qualitative research norms and then applied in Foreign Policy (FP) decision-making process, a well-known approach in studying FP as a subdiscipline in IR. The article concludes that despite certain limitations, the methodology can be an outstanding option for IR qualitative research. \\n \",\"PeriodicalId\":38532,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.34190/ejbrm.20.2.2246\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Business, Management and Accounting\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34190/ejbrm.20.2.2246","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Business, Management and Accounting","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:对于研究人员和博士生来说,将基础理论方法论(GTM)应用于国际关系研究可能是一个具有挑战性的选择。考虑到IR领域的学者熟悉某些传统方法,引入相对独特的方法(如GTM)的概念可能会引起强烈的本体论和认识论问题。在本文中,我认为GTM的实用主义和建构主义版本可以成为IR定性研究中一种成功的研究方法。然而,这种选择受到一系列条件的限制。在现有文献的指导下,在IR定性研究规范的背景下识别和讨论了这些条件,然后将其应用于外交政策决策过程,这是将外交政策作为IR的一个分支学科进行研究的一种著名方法。
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
Applicability of Grounded Theory Methodology in International Relations Studies
Abstract: Engaging the Grounded Theory Methodology (GTM) in International Relation (IR) studies can be a challenging choice for researchers and Ph.D. students. Considering that scholars in the IR field are familiar with certain traditional methodologies, the notion of importing a relatively unique approach such as the GTM can attract strong ontological and epistemological questions. In this article, I contend that pragmatist and constructivist versions of GTM can be a successful research methodology in IR qualitative research. Such choice, however, is constrained by a set of conditions. Guided by existing literature, these conditions were identified and discussed in the context of IR qualitative research norms and then applied in Foreign Policy (FP) decision-making process, a well-known approach in studying FP as a subdiscipline in IR. The article concludes that despite certain limitations, the methodology can be an outstanding option for IR qualitative research.  
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
Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods
Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods Business, Management and Accounting-Business and International Management
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
审稿时长
26 weeks
期刊介绍: The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods (EJBRM) provides perspectives on topics relevant to research methods applied in the field of business and management. Through its publication the journal contributes to the development of theory and practice. The journal accepts academically robust papers that contribute to the area of research methods applied in business and management research. Papers submitted to the journal are double-blind reviewed by members of the reviewer committee or other suitably qualified readers. The Editor reserves the right to reject papers that, in the view of the editorial board, are either of insufficient quality, or are not relevant enough to the subject area. The editor is happy to discuss contributions before submission. The journal publishes work in the categories described below. Research Papers: These may be qualitative or quantitative, empirical or theoretical in nature and can discuss completed research findings or work in progress. Case Studies: Case studies are welcomed illustrating business and management research methods in practise. View Points: View points are less academically rigorous articles usually in areas of controversy which will fuel some interesting debate. Conference Reports and Book Reviews: Anyone who attends a conference or reads a book that they feel contributes to the area of Business Research Methods is encouraged to submit a review for publication.
期刊最新文献
Unraveling Endogeneity: A Systematic Review of Methodologies in Digital Leadership and Remote Work Research Double Bias of Mistakes: Essence, Consequences, and Measurement Method Statistically Validating a Theory Represented by a Venn Diagram How Cognitive Biases Influence Problematic Research Methods Practices Using Mixed Methods to Understand Tax Compliance Behaviour
×
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