|
|
|
|
| LEADER |
03592nam a22005055i 4500 |
| 001 |
22801 |
| 003 |
DE-He213 |
| 005 |
20151204185105.0 |
| 007 |
cr nn 008mamaa |
| 008 |
100301s2002 xxu| s |||| 0|eng d |
| 020 |
# |
# |
|a 9780306471995
|9 978-0-306-47199-5
|
| 024 |
7 |
# |
|a 10.1007/b107542
|2 doi
|
| 050 |
# |
4 |
|a H1-970.9
|
| 072 |
# |
7 |
|a J
|2 bicssc
|
| 072 |
# |
7 |
|a JHB
|2 bicssc
|
| 072 |
# |
7 |
|a SOC000000
|2 bisacsh
|
| 082 |
0 |
4 |
|a 300
|2 23
|
| 100 |
1 |
# |
|a Romm, Norma R. A.
|e author.
|
| 245 |
1 |
0 |
|a Accountability in Social Research
|b Issues and Debates /
|c by Norma R. A. Romm.
|h [electronic resource] :
|
| 264 |
# |
1 |
|a Boston, MA :
|b Springer US,
|c 2002.
|
| 300 |
# |
# |
|a XIII, 317 p.
|b online resource.
|
| 336 |
# |
# |
|a text
|b txt
|2 rdacontent
|
| 337 |
# |
# |
|a computer
|b c
|2 rdamedia
|
| 338 |
# |
# |
|a online resource
|b cr
|2 rdacarrier
|
| 347 |
# |
# |
|a text file
|b PDF
|2 rda
|
| 505 |
0 |
# |
|a The Practice of Social Science: Implications for Researcher Accountability -- A Reconsideration of Constructivism: Discursive Accountability Explored -- Exploring Experimentation -- Exploring Survey Research -- Exploring the Ethnographic Study of Lives -- Exploring Action Research -- Conclusion: Accounting for Different Conceptions of Accountability in Social Research.
|
| 520 |
# |
# |
|a In this book I have concentrated on drawing attention to various conceptions of accountability that might be brought to bear in judging the practice of social research. Much of the book is organized around making explicit the assumptions that influence what counts as ỚSproperỚ<U+00fd> research in society, including assumptions about how social inquirers might be held accountable. My focus is on reviewing discourses around the practice of ỚSprofessionalỚ<U+00fd> inquiry, with a view to reconsidering the way in which people create expectations for accountable social inquiry. My focus hereon is related to my concern that the manner in which judgments about researchersỚ" accountability are made, is not without social consequences for our way of living in society. I have approached the issues by beginning with a discussion of tenets of the position called ỚSpositivismỚ<U+00fd> (so named by certain proponents), and by considering the view on accountability that is implied by adherence to these tenets. Briefly expressed, positivist argumentation suggests that researchers are required to ỚSdo scienceỚ<U+00fd> in a manner that warrants their being considered, indeed, scientists. I use my discussion of accountability as seen within positivist argumentation to explicate ways in which alternative positions have arisen as ways of treating accountability issues. Through my way of comparing the various positions, I hope to provide some indication of the complexity ofethical and accountability issues in social inquiry.
|
| 650 |
# |
0 |
|a Social sciences.
|
| 650 |
# |
0 |
|a Business.
|
| 650 |
# |
0 |
|a Management science.
|
| 650 |
# |
0 |
|a Philosophy and social sciences.
|
| 650 |
# |
0 |
|a Sociology.
|
| 650 |
1 |
4 |
|a Social Sciences.
|
| 650 |
2 |
4 |
|a Social Sciences, general.
|
| 650 |
2 |
4 |
|a Sociology, general.
|
| 650 |
2 |
4 |
|a Methodology of the Social Sciences.
|
| 650 |
2 |
4 |
|a Philosophy of the Social Sciences.
|
| 650 |
2 |
4 |
|a Business and Management, general.
|
| 710 |
2 |
# |
|a SpringerLink (Online service)
|
| 773 |
0 |
# |
|t Springer eBooks
|
| 776 |
0 |
8 |
|i Printed edition:
|z 9780306465642
|
| 856 |
4 |
0 |
|u https://ezaccess.library.uitm.edu.my/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/b107542
|z View fulltext via EzAccess
|
| 912 |
# |
# |
|a ZDB-2-SHU
|
| 912 |
# |
# |
|a ZDB-2-BAE
|
| 950 |
# |
# |
|a Humanities, Social Sciences and Law (Springer-11648)
|