IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/somere/v6y1977i1p3-44.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing Research Methodology

Author

Listed:
  • Donald G. McTavish

    (University of Minnesota, Minneapolis)

  • James D. Cleary

    (University of Minnesota, Minneapolis)

  • Edward E. Brent

    (University of Missouri, Columbia)

  • Lauri Perman

    (Harvard University)

  • Kjell R. Knudsen

    (Royal Norwegian Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, Oslo)

Abstract

This paper reports the development and application of a method for evaluating the methodology of social science research. In this study, 11 social scientists rated the methodology of 126 federally sponsored, social science research projects. Written documentation from each research project was divided into three packets, representing three stages of the research process: proposal, interim report, and completed research. Each project was independently rated at each of the three stages by two different reviewers, using a comprehensive methodology review instrument created for this purpose. A series of factor analyses of the ratingsfor 75 evaluative methodological features reveals a multidimensional structure underlying the evaluations. This structure appears to become more elaborate as research progresses toward completion. The implications of the structuring of methodological assessments are discussed for research funding procedures, research monitoring, the conduct of research, and the training of social scientists.

Suggested Citation

  • Donald G. McTavish & James D. Cleary & Edward E. Brent & Lauri Perman & Kjell R. Knudsen, 1977. "Assessing Research Methodology," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 6(1), pages 3-44, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:6:y:1977:i:1:p:3-44
    DOI: 10.1177/004912417700600101
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/004912417700600101
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/004912417700600101?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael Browne, 1968. "A note on lower bounds for the number of common factors," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 33(2), pages 233-236, June.
    2. Robert Linn, 1968. "A monte carlo approach to the number of factors problem," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 33(1), pages 37-71, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. George Barnett & Joseph Woelfel, 1979. "On the dimensionality of psychological processes," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 215-232, June.
    2. Ledyard Tucker & Raymond Koopman & Robert Linn, 1969. "Evaluation of factor analytic research procedures by means of simulated correlation matrices," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 34(4), pages 421-459, December.
    3. Donald G. Morrison & Hugh Michael Stevenson, 1971. "Political instability in independent black Africa: more dimensions of conflict behavior within nations," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 15(3), pages 347-368, September.
    4. Ronald Gunderson & Pin Ng, 2006. "Summarizing the Effect of a Wide Array of Amenity Measures into Simple Components," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 79(2), pages 313-335, November.
    5. Joan McMahon & Robert Harvey, 2007. "Psychometric Properties of the Reidenbach–Robin Multidimensional Ethics Scale," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 72(1), pages 27-39, April.
    6. Hales, Jeffrey & Moon, James R. & Swenson, Laura A., 2018. "A new era of voluntary disclosure? Empirical evidence on how employee postings on social media relate to future corporate disclosures," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 68, pages 88-108.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:6:y:1977:i:1:p:3-44. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.