The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Metatheory, Interdisciplinarity and Disability Research: A Critical Realist Perspective
Open accessAbstract
Different methodological tendencies within the field of disability research are described, and the reductionism implicit in the historically dominant models is critiqued. The advantages of critical realism over rival metatheoretical positions, including empiricism, social constructionism, neo-Kantianism and hermeneutics, is shown, demonstrating in particular what is called the “double-inclusiveness” of critical realism. A non-reductionist schema for explanation in disability research is established, and the article argues that the phenomenon of disability has the character of a “necessarily laminated system”. The fruitfulness of this approach is then illustrated with an example drawn from the field, and the case for critical realism as an ex ante explicit metatheory and methodology for disability research is further developed. The conclusion reconsiders the nature of metatheory and its role in research.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge
Lyotard, J.-F., Bennington, G., & Massumi, B. (1984) · Poetics Today · doi:10.2307/1772278 · Cited by 14,728
Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature.
Green, P. A., & Haraway, D. J. (1992) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2076334 · Cited by 5,455
Mixed Methodology: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches
Cotten, S. R., Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1999) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2655606 · Cited by 5,204
Bhaskar, R. (2013) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203090732 · Cited by 4,012
Self-citationSayer, A. (2000) · doi:10.4135/9781446218730 · Cited by 2,259
Sayer, A. (2000) · Cited by 1,753
Scientific Realism and Human Emancipation.
Sprinker, M., & Bhaskar, R. (1987) · MLN · doi:10.2307/2905327 · Cited by 1,150
Self-citationFemale Forms: Experiencing and Understanding Disability
Thomas, C. (1999) · Lancaster EPrints (Lancaster University) · Cited by 1,064
Dialectic: The Pulse of Freedom
Bhaskar, R. (1993) · Cited by 1,027
Self-citationThe Possibility of Naturalism: A philosophical critique of the contemporary human sciences
Bhaskar, R. (2013) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203976623 · Cited by 989
Self-citation
Cited by
Ecclestone, K., & Lewis, L. (2014) · Journal of Education Policy · doi:10.1080/02680939.2013.806678 · Cited by 89
Manchaiah, V., Danermark, B., Ahmadi, T., Tomé, D., Zhao, F., Li, Q., Krishna, R., & Germundsson, P. (2015) · Clinical Interventions in Aging · doi:10.2147/cia.s91076 · Cited by 40
Self-citationLitchfield, I., Perryman, K., Avery, A., Campbell, S., Gill, P., & Greenfield, S. (2021) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.113906 · Cited by 27
Tilden, T., Solem, M.-B., Thuen, F., Lorås, L., Stokkebekk, J., & Whittaker, K. (2022) · Fokus på familien · doi:10.18261/fokus.50.4.5 · Cited by 15
Metadata
- Authors
- Bhaskar, R., & Danermark, B.
- Venue
- Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research
- Publisher
- Stockholm University Press
- Published
- 2006-11
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 278-297
- ISSN
- 1501-7419 (ISSN-L)
- 1745-3011
- OpenAlex
- W1976538862
- Cited by
- 342
- References
- 25
- FWCI
- 19.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Metatheory, Interdisciplinarity and Disability Research: A Critical Realist Perspective. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/15017410600914329
- The paper
- Bhaskar, R., & Danermark, B. (2006). Metatheory, Interdisciplinarity and Disability Research: A Critical Realist Perspective. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research. https://doi.org/10.1080/15017410600914329
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
