Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 252

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Integrating Rigor and Relevance in Public Administration Scholarship: The Contribution of Narrative Inquiry

Dodge, Jennifer, Ospina, Sonia M., Foldy, Erica Gabrielle·2005·Public Administration Review

Abstract

A traditional view of scholarly quality defines rigor as the application of method and assumes an implicit connection with relevance. But as an applied field, public administration requires explicit attention to both rigor and relevance. Interpretive scholars' notions of rigor demand an explicit inclusion of relevance as an integral aspect of quality. As one form of interpretive research, narrative inquiry illuminates how this can be done. Appreciating this contribution requires a deeper knowledge of the logic of narrative inquiry, an acknowledgement of the diversity of narrative approaches, and attention to the implications for judging its quality. We use our story about community-based leadership research to develop and illustrate this argument.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2005.00454.x

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 252

Metadata

Authors
Dodge, J., Ospina, S. M., & Foldy, E. G.
Venue
Public Administration Review
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-05
Volume
65
Issue
3
Pages
286-300
ISSN
  • 0033-3352 (ISSN-L)
  • 1540-6210
OpenAlex
W2080604169
Cited by
252
References
0
FWCI
23.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Integrating Rigor and Relevance in Public Administration Scholarship: The Contribution of Narrative Inquiry. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2005.00454.x
The paper
Dodge, J., Ospina, S. M., & Foldy, E. G. (2005). Integrating Rigor and Relevance in Public Administration Scholarship: The Contribution of Narrative Inquiry. Public Administration Review. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2005.00454.x

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.