Methods of Discovery: Heuristics for the Social Sciences
By A. Abbott. 2004
494 citations recorded by the source corpus.
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/786a2edb8a68a619b40b56b78df26140cb3ab2d7
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
- Benjamin Sovacool
- Kirsten E. H. Jenkins
- S. Sorrell
- Tim Schwanen
- Frank W. Geels
- Joseph A. Maxwell
- Maryann P. Feldman
- Karen Locke
Citations in the corpus
- Perspective - Making Doubt Generative: Rethinking the Role of Doubt in the Research Process (2008, background): “In encouraging signs, a growing number of scholars are converging on the importance of better understanding the discovery process in research (Abbott 2004, Alvesson and Skoldberg 2000, Becker 1998, Langley 1999, Locke and Golden-Biddle 1997, Van de Ven 2007, Weick 1995, Zbaracki 2006).”
- Achieving Rigor in Qualitative Analysis: The Role of Active Categorization in Theory Building (2020, unknown): “” (de Rond & Lok, 2016: 1971) rigor (Abbott, 2004: 52).”
- Reducing energy demand through low carbon innovation: A sociotechnical transitions perspective and thirteen research debates (2018, background): “The MLP thus spans foundational social science dichotomies [44]: agency and structure; stability and change; ideational and material dimensions.”
- Realism as a Stance for Mixed Methods Research (2010, background): “Sometimes we need a little realism” (Abbott, 2004, p. 191).”