On the Whys and Hows of Quantitative Research
- PDF / 618,651 Bytes
- 11 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 81 Downloads / 192 Views
COMMENTARY
On the Whys and Hows of Quantitative Research Jose M. Cortina1 Received: 30 August 2017 / Accepted: 23 May 2019 © Springer Nature B.V. 2019
Abstract For this issue of JBE, Zyphur and Pierides (J Bus Ethics 143(1):1–16, 2017) have written a paper on a concept that they have labeled relational validity. The purpose of the paper and of their advocacy for the concept of relational validity is to improve the way that quantitative research (QR) is done by expanding our understanding of its ethics-laden aspects. I agree entirely with the authors that every decision regarding QR is an ethics-laden one and that our research as a whole would be improved by recognition of this fact. I disagree with the authors regarding some of the ways that this improvement might be brought about. Keywords Research ethics · Relational validity · Relevance · Rigor For this issue of JBE, Zyphur and Pierides (2017) have written a paper on a concept that they have labeled relational validity. The purpose of the paper and of their advocacy for the concept of relational validity is to improve the way that quantitative research (QR) is done by expanding our understanding of its ethics-laden aspects. Any reader who is familiar with my recent work knows that I share the author’s interest in improving quantitative research by changing the questions that we ask and the ways that we go about answering them. For my money, this is the most important topic in QR. My approach to the Zyphur and Pierides (2017) paper will be collegial (I hope), but it will also be direct. Zyphur and Pierides (2017) make many points of which I would have every quantitative researcher made aware, most especially their central point that every decision in QR is an ethics-laden one whether we want it to be or not. As a field, we tend to think of decisions regarding treatment of research subjects as ethics-laden, but Zyphur and Pierides (2017) make the point that every decision in the research process is ethics-laden. I could not agree more. If every quantitative researcher in our field took this Zyphur and Pierides (2017) notion to heart, our science would be improved many times over. Zyphur and Pierides (2017) make other points that, if * Jose M. Cortina [email protected] 1
Department of Management and Entrepreneurship, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA 23284, USA
I understand them, should be buried in the backyard, with wooden stakes through the heart and a mouth full of salt just to be safe. My paper is organized as follows. I first explain what I understand to be the elements of and animus behind the concept of relational validity. This explanation is important because the concept is far more complicated than it may seem. Next, I describe the various ways in which I agree with Zyphur and Pierides (2017) and why I agree with them. I then describe the points at which we (may) part company. Finally, I attempt to knit our two perspectives together in a way that accomplishes the goals of Zyphur and Pierides (2017) without straying too far from their
Data Loading...
