Consumer research, interpretive paradigms and methodological ambiguities
| dc.contributor.author | Goulding, Christina | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2008-01-08T12:11:13Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2008-01-08T12:11:13Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 1999 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | European Journal of Marketing, 33:9/10 | |
| dc.identifier.issn | 03090566 | |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.1108/03090569910285805 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/2436/15818 | |
| dc.description | Metadata only | |
| dc.description.abstract | The 1980s and 1990s have witnessed a growing application of qualitative methods, particularly in the study of consumer behaviour. This has led to some division between researchers on the basis of methodological orientation, or a positivist/interpretivist split. Much of the criticism regarding qualitative research centres on issues of clarity, methodological transgressions, and the mixing of methods without clear justification and explication of “why” and “how”. Offers the example of phenomenology and grounded theory, two methods which are often treated as one. Compares and contrasts them in relation to underpinning philosophies, procedures for sampling, data collection and techniques for analysis. Suggests that methods are “personal” and that researcher introspection and the philosophical basis of a given methodology should form the starting-point for enquiry. | |
| dc.language.iso | en | |
| dc.publisher | MCB UP Ltd | |
| dc.relation.url | http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/03090569910285805 | |
| dc.subject | Consumer behaviour | |
| dc.subject | Data analysis | |
| dc.subject | Data collection | |
| dc.subject | Grounded theory | |
| dc.subject | Strategies | |
| dc.subject | Phenomenology | |
| dc.subject | Qualitative techniques | |
| dc.title | Consumer research, interpretive paradigms and methodological ambiguities | |
| dc.type | Journal article | |
| html.description.abstract | The 1980s and 1990s have witnessed a growing application of qualitative methods, particularly in the study of consumer behaviour. This has led to some division between researchers on the basis of methodological orientation, or a positivist/interpretivist split. Much of the criticism regarding qualitative research centres on issues of clarity, methodological transgressions, and the mixing of methods without clear justification and explication of “why” and “how”. Offers the example of phenomenology and grounded theory, two methods which are often treated as one. Compares and contrasts them in relation to underpinning philosophies, procedures for sampling, data collection and techniques for analysis. Suggests that methods are “personal” and that researcher introspection and the philosophical basis of a given methodology should form the starting-point for enquiry. |