The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Retroduction as mixed-methods triangulation in economic research: reorienting economics into social science
Open accessAbstract
This paper argues that mixed-methods triangulation can be understood as the manifestation of retroduction, the logic of inference espoused by critical realism. As such, it can provide the basis upon which different insights upon the same phenomenon can be sensibly combined and thus has the potential to unite aspects of different traditions of economic and social thought. In this regard, the paper supports Lawson's view that the exclusive insistence on mathematical and statistical modelling in economics is misguided. The paper explores how disciplinary boundaries may be broken down and interdisciplinary social science, of which economics can be a part, established.
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
Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: Triangulation in Action.
Jick, T. D. (1979) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392366 · Cited by 7,103
Cited by
Cammelli, F., Levy, S. A., Grabs, J., Valentim, J. F., & Garrett, R. D. (2022) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.130031 · Cited by 39
Tubadji, A., Nijkamp, P., & Angelis, V. (2016) · Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society · doi:10.1093/cjres/rsv035 · Cited by 26
Metadata
- Authors
- Downward, P., & Mearman, A.
- Venue
- Cambridge Journal of Economics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2006-03-27
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 77-99
- ISSN
- 0309-166X (ISSN-L)
- 1464-3545
- OpenAlex
- W2032661218
- Cited by
- 304
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 31.12
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
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.
