Using journal articles to measure the level of quantification in national sociologies

Platt, Jennifer

doi:10.1080/13645579.2014.947644

Cited by 7 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 39 publications

(44 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Most forms of review aim for breadth and exhaustive searches, but the FMRS searches within specific, pre-determined journals. While Platt [26] observed that 'a number of studies have used samples of journal articles', the distinctive feature of the FMRS is the purposive selection of journals. These are chosen for their likelihood to contain articles relevant to the field of inquiryin this case qualitative research published in open access journals that operate an open peer-review process that involves posting the reviewer's reports.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What feedback do reviewers give when reviewing qualitative manuscripts? A focused mapping review and synthesis

Herber

Bradbury‐Jones

Böling

et al. 2020

BMC Med Res Methodol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Peer review is at the heart of the scientific process. With the advent of digitisation, journals started to offer electronic articles or publishing online only. A new philosophy regarding the peer review process found its way into academia: the open peer review. Open peer review as practiced by BioMed Central (BMC) is a type of peer review where the names of authors and reviewers are disclosed and reviewer comments are published alongside the article. A number of articles have been published to assess peer reviews using quantitative research. However, no studies exist that used qualitative methods to analyse the content of reviewers' comments. Methods: A focused mapping review and synthesis (FMRS) was undertaken of manuscripts reporting qualitative research submitted to BMC open access journals from 1 January-31 March 2018. Free-text reviewer comments were extracted from peer review reports using a 77-item classification system organised according to three key dimensions that represented common themes and sub-themes. A two stage analysis process was employed. First, frequency counts were undertaken that allowed revealing patterns across themes/sub-themes. Second, thematic analysis was conducted on selected themes of the narrative portion of reviewer reports. Results: A total of 107 manuscripts submitted to nine open-access journals were included in the FMRS. The frequency analysis revealed that among the 30 most frequently employed themes "writing criteria" (dimension II) is the top ranking theme, followed by comments in relation to the "methods" (dimension I). Besides that, some results suggest an underlying quantitative mindset of reviewers. Results are compared and contrasted in relation to established reporting guidelines for qualitative research to inform reviewers and authors of frequent feedback offered to enhance the quality of manuscripts.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What feedback do reviewers give when reviewing qualitative manuscripts? A focused mapping review and synthesis

Herber

Bradbury‐Jones

Böling

et al. 2020

BMC Med Res Methodol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Unlike some other forms of review such as systematic reviews that strive towards breadth and exhaustive searches, the focused mapping review searches within specific, pre-determined journals. Platt (2016) observed that 'a number of studies have used samples of journal articles' (p. 31) but the distinctive feature of the focused mapping review and synthesis is the purposive selection of journals. These are selected on the basis of their likelihood to contain articles relevant to the field of inquiry -in this case qualitative research published in a range of journals from the health and social sciences.…”

Section: Our Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

The state of qualitative research in health and social science literature: a focused mapping review and synthesis

Bradbury‐Jones

Breckenridge

Clark

et al. 2017

International Journal of Social Research Methodology

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Where a licence is displayed above, please note the terms and conditions of the licence govern your use of this document.When citing, please reference the published version. Take down policyWhile the University of Birmingham exercises care and attention in making items available there are rare occasions when an item has been uploaded in error or has been deemed to be commercially or otherwise sensitive.

show abstract

“…It is necessary to acknowledge the limitations of our empirical strategy, particularly with regard to our ability to generalise these estimates of data use from this set of journals to the wider universe of social science research output (Platt, 2016). The journals we have focused on were, in effect, proscribed by the choices of the scholars who preceded us in this endeavour and there can be little doubt that an approach based on the selection of articles via stratified random sampling would yield a more representative sample of outputs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The demise of the survey? A research note on trends in the use of survey data in the social sciences, 1939 to 2015

Sturgis

Luff

2020

International Journal of Social Research Methodology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We assess the case for a decline in the use of survey data in the social sciences during a period in which conventional survey research has faced existential challenges to its ongoing feasibility and growing competition from new forms of 'Big Data'. Presser (1983) and Converse (1987) undertook content analysis of articles published in a set of leading social science journals, finding a trend of increasing the use of survey data between 1939 and 1980. In an extension of Presser's analysis to the mid-1990s, Saris and Gallhofer (2007) found a further small increase in the rate of survey use, though with notable variability across disciplines. We update these studies to include the period 2014 to 2015. While our analysis reveals the emergence of a small proportion of articles using Big Data, we find no evidence of a concomitant decline in the use of survey data. On the contrary, the use of surveys increased, being used in nearly half of all published articles in this set of journals in 2014/15 and, where articles reported using Big Data, many of them also used survey data. Additionally, we find a substantial increase in the use of secondary survey data over the reference period.

show abstract

Using journal articles to measure the level of quantification in national sociologies

Cited by 7 publications

References 39 publications

What feedback do reviewers give when reviewing qualitative manuscripts? A focused mapping review and synthesis

What feedback do reviewers give when reviewing qualitative manuscripts? A focused mapping review and synthesis

The state of qualitative research in health and social science literature: a focused mapping review and synthesis

The demise of the survey? A research note on trends in the use of survey data in the social sciences, 1939 to 2015

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About