Enhancing methodological reporting in public administration: The functional equivalents framework

Public administration scholarship reflects a multidisciplinary field in which many theoretical perspectives coexist. However, one of the dark sides of such theoretical pluralism is methodological fragmentation. It may be hard to assess the research quality and to engage with the findings from studie...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: MELE, Valentina, ESTEVE, Marc, LEE, Seulki, BEL, Germa, CAPPELLARO, Giulia, PETROVSKY, Nicolai, OSPINA, Sonia M.
Format: text
Language:English
Published: Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University 2020
Subjects:
Online Access:https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soss_research/3313
https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/soss_research/article/4570/viewcontent/EnhancingMethodologicalReporting_2020_av.pdf
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Singapore Management University
Language: English
id sg-smu-ink.soss_research-4570
record_format dspace
spelling sg-smu-ink.soss_research-45702021-06-11T06:16:41Z Enhancing methodological reporting in public administration: The functional equivalents framework MELE, Valentina ESTEVE, Marc LEE, Seulki BEL, Germa CAPPELLARO, Giulia PETROVSKY, Nicolai OSPINA, Sonia M. Public administration scholarship reflects a multidisciplinary field in which many theoretical perspectives coexist. However, one of the dark sides of such theoretical pluralism is methodological fragmentation. It may be hard to assess the research quality and to engage with the findings from studies employing different methodologies, thus limiting meaningful conversations. Moreover, the constant race across social sciences to make methodologies more sophisticated may exacerbate the separation between academic and practitioner audiences. To counterbalance these two trends, this article aims at increasing methodological intelligibility in our field. It does so starting from the idea that each methodology entails choices in the conventional phases of research design, data collection, and data analysis, and that these choices must be reported. The paper nails down and exemplifies such reporting needs for five selected methodologies: survey studies, quantitative experimental studies, quantitative observational studies, qualitative case studies and ethnographies. Based on their discussion and comparison, the paper offers a framework composed by functional equivalents, that is to say, the common denominator among methodological reporting needs. Methodological choices that need reporting include the rationale for the selection of a methodology, delimitation of the study, the research instrument, data processing and ethical clearance. Increasing methodological reporting would facilitate dialogues among different methodological communities, and with practitioner readers. All of which would also promote field building in the scholarship of public administration. 2020-11-01T07:00:00Z text application/pdf https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soss_research/3313 info:doi/10.1177/0275074020933010 https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/soss_research/article/4570/viewcontent/EnhancingMethodologicalReporting_2020_av.pdf http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Research Collection School of Social Sciences eng Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University Methodologies reporting research methods research traditions Public Affairs, Public Policy and Public Administration
institution Singapore Management University
building SMU Libraries
continent Asia
country Singapore
Singapore
content_provider SMU Libraries
collection InK@SMU
language English
topic Methodologies
reporting
research methods
research traditions
Public Affairs, Public Policy and Public Administration
spellingShingle Methodologies
reporting
research methods
research traditions
Public Affairs, Public Policy and Public Administration
MELE, Valentina
ESTEVE, Marc
LEE, Seulki
BEL, Germa
CAPPELLARO, Giulia
PETROVSKY, Nicolai
OSPINA, Sonia M.
Enhancing methodological reporting in public administration: The functional equivalents framework
description Public administration scholarship reflects a multidisciplinary field in which many theoretical perspectives coexist. However, one of the dark sides of such theoretical pluralism is methodological fragmentation. It may be hard to assess the research quality and to engage with the findings from studies employing different methodologies, thus limiting meaningful conversations. Moreover, the constant race across social sciences to make methodologies more sophisticated may exacerbate the separation between academic and practitioner audiences. To counterbalance these two trends, this article aims at increasing methodological intelligibility in our field. It does so starting from the idea that each methodology entails choices in the conventional phases of research design, data collection, and data analysis, and that these choices must be reported. The paper nails down and exemplifies such reporting needs for five selected methodologies: survey studies, quantitative experimental studies, quantitative observational studies, qualitative case studies and ethnographies. Based on their discussion and comparison, the paper offers a framework composed by functional equivalents, that is to say, the common denominator among methodological reporting needs. Methodological choices that need reporting include the rationale for the selection of a methodology, delimitation of the study, the research instrument, data processing and ethical clearance. Increasing methodological reporting would facilitate dialogues among different methodological communities, and with practitioner readers. All of which would also promote field building in the scholarship of public administration.
format text
author MELE, Valentina
ESTEVE, Marc
LEE, Seulki
BEL, Germa
CAPPELLARO, Giulia
PETROVSKY, Nicolai
OSPINA, Sonia M.
author_facet MELE, Valentina
ESTEVE, Marc
LEE, Seulki
BEL, Germa
CAPPELLARO, Giulia
PETROVSKY, Nicolai
OSPINA, Sonia M.
author_sort MELE, Valentina
title Enhancing methodological reporting in public administration: The functional equivalents framework
title_short Enhancing methodological reporting in public administration: The functional equivalents framework
title_full Enhancing methodological reporting in public administration: The functional equivalents framework
title_fullStr Enhancing methodological reporting in public administration: The functional equivalents framework
title_full_unstemmed Enhancing methodological reporting in public administration: The functional equivalents framework
title_sort enhancing methodological reporting in public administration: the functional equivalents framework
publisher Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University
publishDate 2020
url https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soss_research/3313
https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/soss_research/article/4570/viewcontent/EnhancingMethodologicalReporting_2020_av.pdf
_version_ 1770575755288248320