Administration & Society

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (4)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lowery, D.
Right arrow Articles by Evans, K. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Administration & Society, Vol. 36, No. 3, 306-327 (2004)
DOI: 10.1177/0095399704265298
© 2004 SAGE Publications

The Iron Cage of Methodology

The Vicious Circle of Means Limiting Ends Limiting Means...

Daniel Lowery

Indiana University Northwest

Karen G. Evans

Indiana University Northwest

This article addresses the strategies and tools that public administration scholars use to understand phenomena of interest. The range of qualitative methods used has been limited, and the kind of rigor generally associated with quantitative methods has largely been absent in the application of their qualitative counterparts. Two conclusions are drawn from an analysis of articles published in two respected journals: Training on research methods in Ph.D. and M.P.A. programs should be expanded to include a broader range of strategies and tools, and the rigorous use of a broader range of research tools promises to better position the field of public administration to identify, examine, and answer the many big questions that it now faces.

Key Words: qualitative research methods • empirical research • truth claims


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Administration & SocietyHome page
K. G. Evans and D. Lowery
The Scholarship of Elegance and Significance: Expressive and Aesthetic Truth Claims
Administration Society, March 1, 2008; 40(1): 3 - 24.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Qualitative Social WorkHome page
C. A. Lietz, C. L. Langer, and R. Furman
Establishing Trustworthiness in Qualitative Research in Social Work: Implications from a Study Regarding Spirituality
Qualitative Social Work, December 1, 2006; 5(4): 441 - 458.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Administration & SocietyHome page
K. G. Evans and D. Lowery
Prescriptive Thinking: Normative Claims as Scholarship
Administration Society, May 1, 2006; 38(2): 147 - 165.
[Abstract] [PDF]