Search

Copyright of South Architecture / Nanfang Jianzhu is the property of South Architecture Editorial Office and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Within this special issue, we turn our attention to critical perspectives within the communication discipline and seek to illuminate the implementation of critical methods across its broader contexts. While the communication discipline has historically been grounded in the normativity and centering of whiteness, critical perspectives, which are characterized by attention to communicative practices that attend to systems of power and hierarchy across social spheres, have been broadly integrated into and meaningfully shaped the study of communication contexts such as rhetoric, intercultural communication, and performance studies. We argue, however, that the incorporation of critical perspectives within the larger discipline remains underdeveloped. Therefore, in this special issue, we present articles that employ critical methodological approaches to offer important new ways of studying and centering marginalized identities, positionalities, and epistemologies across a range of contexts. Ultimately, we argue for a more expansive approach to thinking and teaching about methodology in general, and critical methods specifically, that inspires further "play" among communication scholars who value the need for social justice imperatives and epistemic delinking across all facets of communication studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research articles are a primary medium for scholars to communicate with disciplinary community, but there is little evidence suggesting how much writing practices on different research subjects within a discipline diverge in a single journal. This study remedies the oversight by comparing the use of interactive metadiscourse in the papers of Applied Linguistics on language acquisition and discourse analysis. Based on a corpus of 30 research articles on each research subject, results show that writers in language acquisition make a significantly more frequent use of additive and consequential transitional markers, reformulators, and non-integral citations. However, discourse analysts prefer to invest in exemplifiers, linear and non-linear references and topic shifts. All the differences can be attributable to the characteristics of disciplinary research paradigms, which lead to different knowledge-making and interactive patterns in academic writing. The findings offer empirical evidence to the rhetorical function of metadiscourse in constructing disciplinary knowledge, and raise pedagogical implications for EAP instructors to help scholars in applied linguistics increase international publications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundThe World Health Organization (WHO) has called for the evidence-informed integration of traditional medicine (TM) into health systems. Research rigor requires a good “fit” between research designs and what is being studied. The expectation that TM research fully adheres to biomedical evidentiary norms potentially creates tensions, as TM paradigms have their own distinct features. A scoping review will be conducted to describe and characterize the research approaches used in TM and their paradigmatic alignment with the TM being studied.MethodsThis scoping review protocol was informed by Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methods. This protocol outlines an a priori conceptual framework, provisionally termed “paradigmatic alignment.” The review will include all populations, TM types, research approaches (i.e., methods, methodologies, frameworks, strategies), cultural contexts, and health care settings. Up to 38 English and non-English language databases will be searched sequentially for both published and gray literature until reaching data saturation across relevant concepts and contexts. Analysis will begin deductively, using a pre-piloted data extraction template to describe the TM research approaches. A basic qualitative content analysis of a sample of evidence sources will explore how research approaches are applied or modified to align with the TM therapeutic paradigm, and the manner in which they co-exist, contrast, complement or align with established biomedical research approaches. The findings will be narrated and summarized in charting tables and figures. The review will be reported according to the PRISMA scoping review extension. Consultative engagement with knowledge users across all review stages is planned.DiscussionAligned with the principle of Two-Eyed Seeing (Etuaptmumk), wherein Indigenous/traditional and biomedical knowledges may equitably co-exist, this review promises to advance scholarly insights of critical value in an increasingly pluralistic, globalized world.Clinical trial registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/, identifier INPLASY2023110071.

Educational researchers continue to polarize into 'qualitative' and 'quantitative' camps, with these terms often functioning as global identity markers, rather than as styles of research that are available to anyone. Many scholars have lamented the drawbacks of researchers being siloed into opposing, apparently incommensurable research paradigms, and have advocated for more inclusive and mixed-methods approaches. However, mixed methods research is not necessarily a good fit for every researcher, research study or research question. In this theoretical paper, I argue that the distinctions commonly made between qualitative and quantitative research are fundamentally incoherent and that the challenges researchers face across both styles of research are essentially analogous. I present methodological pragmatism as an accessible and convenient, compatibilist framework for making research design choices which cut across qualitative-quantitative divides. I propose that the exploratory-(dis)confirmatory distinction is of considerably more practical relevance to educational researchers than qualitative-quantitative ones, and I outline how methodological pragmatism, while consistent with a degree of methodological specialism, recognizes the availability of all research methods for all researchers. Methodological pragmatism liberates researchers in education to conduct the most rigorous research possible by drawing on any methods from any tradition that will further their research goals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite a long history of citation research, its focus has been on the linguistic and rhetorical characteristics of citations rather than their semantic nature. Using a move-based approach grounded in the CARS model (Swales, 1990), this paper studies the sorts of source ideas cited in different parts of literature reviews (LR) of Information Systems research articles following the design science research (DSR) and interpretivist research (IR) paradigms. Findings reveal three types of epistemically-oriented semantic content – theoretical, research, and methodological – and one type that is non-epistemically-framed, which vary quantitatively and qualitatively between the DSR and IR LRs. For example, both types of LRs cite more often in Move 1 Establishing a territory than in Moves 2 and 3 Establishing a niche and Occupying the niche, with theoretical terminologies, definitions, propositions being referred to more frequently in the IR writing than in the DSR writing. On the other hand, citations in the DSR writing often display prescriptive propositions, design concepts, artefacts, and methods which are absent from the IR writing. These findings not only help us better understand how citation is shaped and constrained by rhetorical moves and research paradigms but also provide implications for the teaching of citation content. • Literature reviews of information systems research articles are examined. • A move-based approach grounded in the CARS model is used. • A semantic typology of citations is developed. • Four types of citations are found. • Methodological citations appear only in literature reviews of research articles with the design science research paradigm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Baker et al. (2021) recently proposed using a philosophical framework to classify learning analytics research in terms of four paradigms. Here I build on their theme of reflecting on philosophical differences in different approaches to learning analytics. I first present two limitations of their classification, which raise questions for how to best classify different approaches in learning analytics. In an attempt to resolve these questions, I draw upon the bias-variance tradeoff from machine learning and show how different learning analytics approaches can be viewed in terms of their positions on the tradeoff. However, I claim that this is not enough, as we must also be attuned to the underlying epistemologies behind different approaches. I claim a constructivist epistemology for learning analytics has been missing, which could, in part, explain Baker et al.'s (2021) observation that constructivist work has been relatively absent in established learning analytics research communities. Drawing on prior work from different fields, I present a sketch of what a constructivist data science philosophy might look like and how it could help advance learning analytics. Sitting at the nexus of the learning sciences and machine learning, the field of learning analytics is in a unique position to theorize about philosophy and epistemology; this paper encourages us to pursue more work in such a direction.

ABSTRACT: The use of qualitative research in dairy science has increased considerably in recent years, providing the opportunity to inform research and practice. This review aims to enhance the accessibility of qualitative research among a range of audiences and specifically: (1) provide an overview of what qualitative research is and the value it can bring to scientific inquiries in the dairy context, (2) illustrate the emergence of qualitative dairy science research in the past 15 to 20 years, (3) outline the role of the researcher and key philosophical assumptions underlying qualitative research, (4) describe qualitative research approaches and methods used in dairy science research, and (5) highlight key aspects of qualitative inquiry used to ensure research trustworthiness. Qualitative approaches in dairy science enable researchers to understand myriad topics including stakeholder relationships, decision-making, and behaviors regarding dairy cattle management, animal welfare, and disease prevention and control measures. Approaches that were used often for qualitative data collection were individual interviews and focus groups, and variations of thematic analysis were common analytical frameworks. To assess public values, attitudes, and perceptions, mixed methods questionnaires that combined quantitative data with qualitative data from open-ended questions were used regularly. Although still used infrequently, action research and participatory approaches have the potential to bridge the research-implementation gap by facilitating group-based learning and on-farm changes. Some publications described the philosophical assumptions inherent to qualitative research, and many authors included reflexivity and positionality statements. Although a comprehensive description of strategies to meet trustworthiness criteria for qualitative research was uncommon, many publications mentioned certain aspects of trustworthiness, such as member checking, researcher triangulation, and the recording of reflexive notes. Qualitative research has been used to deepen our understanding of phenomena relevant to the dairy sector and has opened the door for a broad array of new opportunities. In addition to having merit on its own, qualitative research can guide, inform, and expand on quantitative research, and an understanding of the core pillars of qualitative research can foster interdisciplinary collaborations.

Copyright of Journal of Beijing University of Civil Engineering & Architecture is the property of Journal of Beijing University of Civil Engineering & Architecture Editorial Office and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The use of qualitative research in dairy science has increased considerably in recent years, providing the opportunity to inform research and practice. This review aims to enhance the accessibility of qualitative research among a range of audiences and specifically: (1) provide an overview of what qualitative research is and the value it can bring to scientific inquiries in the dairy context, (2) illustrate the emergence of qualitative dairy science research in the past 15 to 20 years, (3) outline the role of the researcher and key philosophical assumptions underlying qualitative research, (4) describe qualitative research approaches and methods used in dairy science research, and (5) highlight key aspects of qualitative inquiry used to ensure research trustworthiness. Qualitative approaches in dairy science enable researchers to understand myriad topics including stakeholder relationships, decision-making, and behaviors regarding dairy cattle management, animal welfare, and disease prevention and control measures. Approaches that were used often for qualitative data collection were individual interviews and focus groups, and variations of thematic analysis were common analytical frameworks. To assess public values, attitudes, and perceptions, mixed methods questionnaires that combined quantitative data with qualitative data from open-ended questions were used regularly. Although still used infrequently, action research and participatory approaches have the potential to bridge the research-implementation gap by facilitating group-based learning and on-farm changes. Some publications described the philosophical assumptions inherent to qualitative research, and many authors included reflexivity and positionality statements. Although a comprehensive description of strategies to meet trustworthiness criteria for qualitative research was uncommon, many publications mentioned certain aspects of trustworthiness, such as member checking, researcher triangulation, and the recording of reflexive notes. Qualitative research has been used to deepen our understanding of phenomena relevant to the dairy sector and has opened the door for a broad array of new opportunities. In addition to having merit on its own, qualitative research can guide, inform, and expand on quantitative research, and an understanding of the core pillars of qualitative research can foster interdisciplinary collaborations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A research paradigm represents how a researcher views the nature of reality and guides how they engage in research to generate knowledge from that reality. Power is a construct that impacts on the individual actions of the researcher and the participants, and their interactions with each other, across a range of perspectives of reality. Qualitative researchers select different paradigmatic stances to represent how they consider and work with the influences of power on these human relations. This influences their decisions about which research design and methodology they select. Drawing on my doctoral study, which explored the process by which a group of occupational therapists designed an intervention for caregivers of children on anti-retroviral treatment living in low-income conditions in South Africa, I describe my process of selecting a poststructuralist paradigm, an instrumental case study design, and a co-operative inquiry methodology to illuminate the operation of power in the research process. An overview of the potential offerings and limitations of different paradigms, research designs and methods, as applied to this research example, are presented to support my assertions. In conclusion, I argue for the more consistent consideration and description of the interplay between paradigms, research design and methodology, to ensure the selection of the best suited combination to explore and describe the influences of power in the research process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Legacy, Life and Work of Geo Widengren and the Study of the History of Religions after World War II , editor Göran Larsson, illuminates the scholarly career of Geo Widengren and the development of the Study of Religion. We can learn from his example to pursue historical and comparative studies, develop philological competence, and create bold theories. However, Widengren's philological approach sometimes led to what can be labelled the philological fallacy, too much faith in the importance of mastery of languages at the cost of more critical and self-critical views. Philological and historical skills should be supplemented with theoretical awareness and an adequate methodology. In The Legacy we learn about how academic culture was built in the last century, how it operated, and we also understand why it was altered. It had in addition been interesting to hear more about female scholars in Widengren's milieu. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article takes as point of departure the current critique of ‘general education’ (Allgemeine Pädagogik) as a paradigm no longer possible nor relevant. This leads (section I) into a discussion of a current, diagnostic assumption which claims, that the field of research is split into competing paradigms (between a pedagogical ‘general education’ and a broad inter-disciplinary ‘educational research’), which are in mutual conflict. Next (section II) the article looks into Benner (2005) and the concept of ‘innovative transmission’ (innovativ tradering) to explore a possible remedy in light of the assumption of pedagogical research being split in two. On the basis of Vogel and Krüger’s notion of “Brückenkonzept” (‘conceptual connecting principle’) (Krüger, et. al. 1994; Vogel, 1998) a Bildung-concept is suggested (section III), which applies the ‘innovative transmission’ as leverage and possible remedy in light of a split in the research paradigms.

Copyright of Stratum Plus Journal is the property of P.P. Stratum plus and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In this article, the authors explore and contribute to producing a performative research paradigm where post-qualitative as well as artistic research might dwell and breathe. Entering a thread of discussion that started with Haseman's A manifesto for performative research in 2006, and building on their own friction-led research processes at the edges of qualitative research, the authors plug in with performativity, non-representational theories and methodologies, post-qualitative inquiry and post approaches. A performative paradigm for post-qualitative inquiry is proposed, where knowledge is viewed as knowledge-in-becoming as the constant creation of difference through researcher entanglement with the research phenomenon and wider world. A performative paradigm produces a space for movement, (artistic) freedom, (post-qualitative) experimentation and inclusion. A performative research paradigm also offers provocations that shake long-established notions about what research is and should be. Within a performative research paradigm, learning/be(com)ing/knowing is always in-becoming – as is the performative paradigm itself. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents two methodological ways to overcome the dichotomy between the quantitative approach and qualitative approaches. On the one hand, abductive research logic is presented and explained. This research logic incorporates characteristics of deductive and inductive reasoning, without being their addition, which gives it specific characteristics. On the other hand, the mixed methods approach is presented and pushed towards its full development, assuming all its consequences. In its most common and orthodox application this approach has remained halfway in relation to its promise to overcome the division between quantitative and qualitative methods. This development fits with denominations such as mixed research or merged methods research. Both ways offer paths that allow old practices anchored in the quantitativequalitative divide, which is often presented as having a paradigmatic character, to be overcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Cuadernos de Arte de la Universidad de Granada is the property of Universidad de Granada and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article focuses on the definition of interpretive research, which is relatively unfamiliar within Slovenia. Other parts of the world also lack a common definition, and various authors classify it differently. Some authors define it as a research method within the interpretive paradigm, whereas others describe it as a type of research or a way of interpreting data that can also be applied within other paradigms. It is often equated with qualitative research. The article presents its role and importance in research, with particular emphasis on its utility in the field of pedagogy.

Operations strategy is a mature field and requires novel insights for further research and practitioners in companies. To fill this gap, 280 articles were analyzed, by way of a systematic literature review, considering two approaches: topic perspectives (content, process, and competitive priorities), and research paradigms (analysis perspective, general methodology, research design, research typology, and alternative paradigms). Eight challenges were identified and discussed to make novel contributions to cutting-edge knowledge. Among other things, it was found that people’s perceptions of object reality prevail as the dominant paradigm, regarding the source and type of information used. In this sense, the literature suggests additional investigation through the direct observation of object reality and experimental studies, in which the action research approach could play an important role as an alternative paradigm. Additionally, considering Industry 4.0 advances, new research opportunities have emerged which permit artificial reconstruction of object reality to support decision-making. The main contribution of this study is to discuss eight challenges by which to improve research relevance and make both academic and practical contributions. Moreover, several useful data for researchers are provided, including statistics regarding response rates in survey research (dominant paradigm). Finally, these findings can be used to perform further research with additional functional strategies in the companies.

Mixed methods research has become an important approach to research worldwide. The combination of qualitative and quantitative research methods has made it possible for a deeper and broader understanding of multifaceted phenomena, thereby offering readers more confidence in research findings and conclusions. The use of mixed method designs became more established in the 1980s and early 1990s, but some controversies surrounding the approach remain. Nonetheless, experts in the field of mixed methods research have continued to work on the central premise that the use of qualitative and quantitative approaches, in combination, provides a better understanding of research problems than either approach alone. This concept paper discusses some of the known controversies around mixed methods with the aim of providing useful insights to emerging researchers interested in learning the methodology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article explore what it means for a qualitative study to be trustworthy, how trustworthiness can be attained by researchers, and how lactation professionals can assess the studies they read for trustworthiness. Topics include aim of qualitative research is to understand meaning, and the data to be analyzed are words and observations.

Considering the lack of systematic reviews on e-government research, this study includes research categories, spatial structure, research paradigms and noteworthy future topics in the domain of e-government. We collect 142 keywords from 2646 papers published in the Web of Science from 2000 to 2019 as the study object. Then, we identify four research categories: (1) technology and modelling in e-government, (2) drivers of e-government development, (3) public management and (4) governmental management. From public and government perspectives, we outline the spatial structure which includes theories and practices research and conclude four research paradigms: (1) theoretical modelling and application, (2) e-government development, (3) status of public management and (4) status of governmental management. Finally, we develop a 3D spatial map to analyse noteworthy topics and explore the well-studied themes: government-to-citizen, government-to-government and government-to-business, and the under-studied themes: government-to-civil society organisations and citizens-to-citizens, which helps scholars research e-government roundly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents the decisions that are presented in the transition from theoretical to methodological, as a means to establish coherence and validity in an investigation that addresses strategic design's contribution to organizational transformations. A coherent methodological proposal is presented between the ontological posture (intersubjectivity), epistemological posture (pragmatism), and research method (mixed) required to address the object of research in strategic design, and to consistently select the various techniques and procedures required. This proposal is pertinent to respond to the research question of what the role fo strategic design might be, as related to organizational transformation, to the extent that it provides competencies (human capital), processes (structural capital), and a relationship model (relational capital). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In response to the global challenge of low-income housing provision, research on understanding the housing provision mechanisms has gained a reputation among emerging scholars and practitioners in architecture, urban development, housing, and public policy. An effective provision system entails the institutions and stakeholders comprehending their interrelations within the housing market context, lacking conceptual clarity. Challenging roles of institutions and stakeholders within the domain of housing provision necessitates the groundwork to study the contextual positions and relations of stakeholders as an analogous component and the analysis of institutional frameworks. The paper provides the theoretical foundations within the metaphorical bases for integrating the respective analytical approaches, i.e., institutional analysis (IA) and stakeholder analysis (SA), drawing on critical theoretical constructs. By analytical comparison of empirical evidence of IA and SA in housing research against the prompting keywords, critical reflections offer the conceptual foundation of new research agenda through IA-SA integrated approach. The study thereby advances the theoretical understanding between the regulatory level (institutions) and engagement level (stakeholders). It proposes a multi-level analysis process that complements the IA-SA integration for examining the provision systems in the context of low-income housing.

Abstract Background It may take 15 years or longer before research evidence is integrated into clinical practice. This evidence-to-practice gap has deleterious effects on patients as well as research and clinical processes. Bringing clinical knowledge into the research process, however, has the potential to close the evidence-to-practice gap. The NEUROTRANS-Project attempts to bring research and practice together by focusing on two groups that usually operate separately in their communities: general practitioners and neuroscientists. Although both groups focus on dementia as an area of work, they do so in different contexts and without opportunities to share their expertise. Finding new treatment pathways for patients with dementia will require an equal knowledge exchange among researchers and clinicians along with the integration of that knowledge into research processes, so that both groups will benefit from the expertise of the other. Methods The NEUROTRANS-Project uses a qualitative, multi-stage research design to explore how neuroscientists and general practitioners (GPs) approach dementia. Using a grounded theory methodology, it analyzes semi-structured interviews, case vignettes, focus groups with GPs in Saxony-Anhalt, Germany, and informal conversations with, and observations of, neuroscientists from the German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases in Magdeburg. Results The NEUROTRANS-Project identified a clear division of labor between two highly specialized professional groups. Neuroscientists focus abstractly on nosology whereas general practitioners tend to patient care following a hermeneutic approach integrating the patients’ perspective of illness. These different approaches to dementia create a barrier to constructive dialogue and the capacity of these groups to do research together with a common aim. Additionally, the broader system of research funding and health care within which the two groups operate reinforces their divide thereby limiting joint research capacity. Conclusions Overcoming barriers to research collaboration between general practitioners and neuroscientists requires a shift in perspective in which both groups actively engage with the other’s viewpoints to facilitate knowledge circulation (KC). Bringing ‘art into science and science into art’, i.e. amalgamating the hermeneutic approach with the perspective of nosology, is the first step in developing joint research agendas that have the potential to close the evidence-to-practice gap.

Bridging Indigenous and Western paradigms in research can offer benefits but it can also be challenging because of the need to navigate power dynamics and differences in perspectives. Amid the Western epistemic norms that dominate most academic spaces in Canada, researchers must endeavour to bridge paradigms in such a way that Indigenous rights to self-determination are upheld, ensuring that Indigenous paradigms or worldviews are not subsumed by or tokenized within Western paradigms. Researchers must also be able to demonstrate the coherence of their project, showing how all aspects fit well together despite the involvement of different perspectives. This article shares lessons learned from a research project in which we aimed to coherently bridge Inuit worldviews and the critical paradigm in a manner that foregrounds Inuit perspectives. We present an accountability framework that supported project planning and decision-making in alignment with our core project intentions by prioritizing requirements for paradigm bridging. This framework was guided by concepts from or based on Inuit knowledge (i.e., piliriqatigiinniq and the Qaggiq Model) and qualitative research (i.e., meaningful coherence). We draw examples from our study to illustrate how we strove to achieve a balanced, dynamic relationship between Inuit and Western epistemologies, which was facilitated by shared points of common ground. Intentional focus was required to continually resist and redress power imbalances. We emphasize the importance of reflexivity and humility to the whole endeavour, highlighting the relevance of researcher positionality from the perspective of the Qallunaaq (White) lead researcher. While acknowledging that any effort to bridge paradigms must be specific to context, we propose that following an iterative, collaborative, reflexive, dynamic and responsive process can enable accountability to Indigenous communities and fidelity to researcher intentions. Such actions support the production of research that is meaningful, valued and useful to the population it intends to serve. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this paper is to indicate how dominant research paradigms, social theories, and an epistocracy influence the governance of green and ecological infrastructures within a South African local government context. Paradigms and theories play an important constituting role that (local) government actors and institutions actively and subconsciously promote within the green and ecological infrastructure policy landscape. Research conducted by the author indicates that epistemic actors within the eThekwini Metropolitan Municipality, South Africa, use paradigms and theories to promote green and ecological infrastructures, as materialities, coupled with climate change adaptation and mitigation and water governance and security aspirations. I conclude that an epistocracy is active in the municipality and that it promotes the development and implementation of the infrastructure types through a positivist paradigm and accompanied theories. In this article, I will report on a two-year study that investigated eThekwini's green and ecological infrastructure policy landscape. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Operations strategy is a mature field and requires novel insights for further research and practitioners in companies. To fill this gap, 280 articles were analyzed, by way of a systematic literature review, considering two approaches: topic perspectives (content, process, and competitive priorities), and research paradigms (analysis perspective, general methodology, research design, research typology, and alternative paradigms). Eight challenges were identified and discussed to make novel contributions to cutting-edge knowledge. Among other things, it was found that people’s perceptions of object reality prevail as the dominant paradigm, regarding the source and type of information used. In this sense, the literature suggests additional investigation through the direct observation of object reality and experimental studies, in which the action research approach could play an important role as an alternative paradigm. Additionally, considering Industry 4.0 advances, new research opportunities have emerged which permit artificial reconstruction of object reality to support decision-making. The main contribution of this study is to discuss eight challenges by which to improve research relevance and make both academic and practical contributions. Moreover, several useful data for researchers are provided, including statistics regarding response rates in survey research (dominant paradigm). Finally, these findings can be used to perform further research with additional functional strategies in the companies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of Elementary Education / Revija za Elementarno Izobraževanje is the property of University of Maribor, Faculty of Education and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Trends toward convergence on common methodologies and standardized templates restrict the diversity of qualitative methods in organizational research. Considering that graduate education is a critical process in the socialization of researchers into the norms and dominant practices of their discipline, graduate students' socialization into research methodologies is vital for understanding methodological convergence. The purpose of our study was to understand how graduate students' socialization shapes their methodological and paradigmatic preferences. Showcasing methodological bricolage as an alternative to qualitative templates, we constructed a research design that combined thematic, discourse, and narrative analyses to investigate graduate students' reflections throughout a qualitative methods course introducing alternative research paradigms. Our findings highlight the role of institutional, disciplinary, and personal influences as well as identity work in researchers' socialization and trace alternative trajectories by which socialization and methodological identity construction processes may unfold. We offer a sketch of methodological socialization and suggest that its understanding should be central to nurturing paradigmatic and methodological plurality in qualitative research. We conclude with implications for future research and for research methods training. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This review analyzes the role of emotions in accounting research. Drawing on an analytical framework that differentiates between joy-, fear-, anger- and sadness-based emotions, we disentangle the bidirectional dynamics between emotions and accounting, and show how accounting both conditions and is conditioned by emotions. In this way, we demonstrate how an emotional turn in accounting scholarship challenges and expands our understanding of financial accounting, management accounting, and auditing. In addition, we raise awareness about the performative role of ontological and epistemological positions in accounting research on emotions. We find that scholars from different paradigmatic traditions mostly acknowledge each other's work, but often miss the opportunity to fully embrace it. By illustrating the productive insights that emerge from a stronger inter-paradigmatic engagement, we draw attention to the necessity (and excitement) of crossing the great divide. We conclude by outlining avenues of future research on emotions in accounting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The World Health Organization (WHO) has called for the evidence-informed integration of traditional medicine (TM) into health systems. Research rigor requires a good "fit" between research designs and what is being studied. The expectation that TM research fully adheres to biomedical evidentiary norms potentially creates tensions, as TM paradigms have their own distinct features. A scoping review will be conducted to describe and characterize the research approaches used in TM and their paradigmatic alignment with the TM being studied., Methods: This scoping review protocol was informed by Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methods. This protocol outlines an a priori conceptual framework, provisionally termed "paradigmatic alignment." The review will include all populations, TM types, research approaches (i.e., methods, methodologies, frameworks, strategies), cultural contexts, and health care settings. Up to 38 English and non-English language databases will be searched sequentially for both published and gray literature until reaching data saturation across relevant concepts and contexts. Analysis will begin deductively, using a pre-piloted data extraction template to describe the TM research approaches. A basic qualitative content analysis of a sample of evidence sources will explore how research approaches are applied or modified to align with the TM therapeutic paradigm, and the manner in which they co-exist, contrast, complement or align with established biomedical research approaches. The findings will be narrated and summarized in charting tables and figures. The review will be reported according to the PRISMA scoping review extension. Consultative engagement with knowledge users across all review stages is planned., Discussion: Aligned with the principle of Two-Eyed Seeing ( Etuaptmumk ), wherein Indigenous/traditional and biomedical knowledges may equitably co-exist, this review promises to advance scholarly insights of critical value in an increasingly pluralistic, globalized world. Clinical trial registration : https://clinicaltrials.gov/, identifier INPLASY2023110071., Competing Interests: JH has received payments, travel and/or accommodation for providing expert advice about traditional, complementary and integrative medicine to industry, government bodies and non-government organizations. NI, JH, and SG have spoken at conferences or provided consultations for which honoraria, registration, travel and/or accommodation have been paid for by the organizers. The remaining author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Ijaz, Hunter, Grant and Templeman.)

Background: It may take 15 years or longer before research evidence is integrated into clinical practice. This evidence-to-practice gap has deleterious effects on patients as well as research and clinical processes. Bringing clinical knowledge into the research process, however, has the potential to close the evidence-to-practice gap. The NEUROTRANS-Project attempts to bring research and practice together by focusing on two groups that usually operate separately in their communities: general practitioners and neuroscientists. Although both groups focus on dementia as an area of work, they do so in different contexts and without opportunities to share their expertise. Finding new treatment pathways for patients with dementia will require an equal knowledge exchange among researchers and clinicians along with the integration of that knowledge into research processes, so that both groups will benefit from the expertise of the other. Methods: The NEUROTRANS-Project uses a qualitative, multi-stage research design to explore how neuroscientists and general practitioners (GPs) approach dementia. Using a grounded theory methodology, it analyzes semi-structured interviews, case vignettes, focus groups with GPs in Saxony-Anhalt, Germany, and informal conversations with, and observations of, neuroscientists from the German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases in Magdeburg. Results: The NEUROTRANS-Project identified a clear division of labor between two highly specialized professional groups. Neuroscientists focus abstractly on nosology whereas general practitioners tend to patient care following a hermeneutic approach integrating the patients' perspective of illness. These different approaches to dementia create a barrier to constructive dialogue and the capacity of these groups to do research together with a common aim. Additionally, the broader system of research funding and health care within which the two groups operate reinforces their divide thereby limiting joint research capacity. Conclusions: Overcoming barriers to research collaboration between general practitioners and neuroscientists requires a shift in perspective in which both groups actively engage with the other's viewpoints to facilitate knowledge circulation (KC). Bringing 'art into science and science into art', i.e. amalgamating the hermeneutic approach with the perspective of nosology, is the first step in developing joint research agendas that have the potential to close the evidence-to-practice gap. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The objective is to present a quick overview of systematic research design and methods with special considerations of quantitative research in business research. Later, this study recognized the levels and implications of theory in academic literature. The techniques have been discussed in the accession with critical issues in determining the sampling method and sample size. Further, the review on sample size was meticulously supported by various authors. The measurement scale has also been addressed and supported by previous literature. Finally, this study will guide the new researchers by providing a handful of knowledge about research concepts. The study has summarized the essential concepts with citations of key authors in business research to find much more on research topics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]