ArticleIntegrative psychological & behavioral science2012
Eclecticism as the foundation of meta-theoretical, mixed methods and interdisciplinary research in social sciences.
Article in Integrative psychological & behavioral science, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The change and development of statistical methods used in research articles in child development 1930-2010.Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2014Review
- Becoming conscious of the American middle class (un)consciousness.Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article examines the value of "eclecticism" as the foundation of meta-theoretical, mixed methods and interdisciplinary research in social sciences. On the basis of the analysis of the historical background of the concept, it is first suggested that eclecticism-based theoretical scholarship in social sciences could benefit from the more systematic research method that has been developed for synthesizing theoretical works under the name metatheorizing. Second, it is suggested that the mixed methods community could base its research approach on philosophical eclecticism instead of pragmatism because the basic idea of eclecticism is much more in sync with the nature of the combined research tradition. Finally, the Kuhnian frame is used to support the argument for interdisciplinary research and, hence, eclecticism in social sciences (rather than making an argument against multiple paradigms). More particularly, it is suggested that integrating the different (inter)disciplinary traditions and schools into one is not necessarily desirable at all in social sciences because of the complexity and openness of the research field. If it is nevertheless attempted, experience in economics suggests that paradigmatic unification comes at a high price.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22076693What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.