The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
How Do We Justify Knowledge Produced Within Interpretive Approaches?
Abstract
The use of interpretive approaches within management and organizational sciences has increased substantially. However, appropriate criteria for justifying research results from interpretive approaches have not developed so rapidly alongside their adaptation. This article examines the potential of common criteria for justifying knowledge produced within interpretive approaches. Based on this investigation, appropriate criteria are identified and a strategy for achieving them is proposed. Finally, an interpretive study of competence in organizations is used to demonstrate how the proposed criteria and strategy can be applied to justify knowledge produced within interpretive approaches.
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
Bourdieu, P. (1990) · doi:10.1515/9781503621749 · Cited by 17,271
Bruner, J. (1996) · doi:10.4159/9780674251083 · Cited by 6,231
The phenomenology of the social world
Bittner, E., Schutz, A., Walsh, G., & Lehnert, F. (1968) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2092457 · Cited by 3,588
Understanding and Validity in Qualitative Research
Maxwell, J. (1992) · Harvard Educational Review · doi:10.17763/haer.62.3.8323320856251826 · Cited by 2,951 · cited 2×
“According to Smith and Deemer, criteria such as plausibility and credibility validity (Hammersely, 1990) and descriptive validity (Maxwell, 1992) are successful in the first instance but fail in the second.”
BackgroundQuality in Qualitative Research
Seale, C. (1999) · Qualitative Inquiry · doi:10.1177/107780049900500402 · Cited by 1,743
Fertile Obsession: Validity After Poststructuralism
Lather, P. (1993) · The Sociological Quarterly · doi:10.1111/j.1533-8525.1993.tb00112.x · Cited by 937
Cited by
Conz, E., & Magnani, G. (2020) · European Management Journal · doi:10.1016/j.emj.2019.12.004 · Cited by 573
Quality in Interpretive Engineering Education Research: Reflections on an Example Study
Walther, J., Sochacka, N. W., & Kellam, N. N. (2013) · Journal of Engineering Education · doi:10.1002/jee.20029 · Cited by 458
Understanding “Zoom fatigue”: A mixed‐method approach
Nesher Shoshan, H., & Wehrt, W. (2022) · Applied Psychology · doi:10.1111/apps.12360 · Cited by 304
Dodgson, M., Gann, D. M., & Salter, A. (2007) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1070.0287 · Cited by 101
Meijerink, J., Keegan, A., & Bondarouk, T. (2021) · The International Journal of Human Resource Management · doi:10.1080/09585192.2020.1867616 · Cited by 72
Metadata
- Authors
- Sandberg, J.
- Venue
- Organizational Research Methods
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2005-01
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 41-68
- ISSN
- 1094-4281 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-7425
- OpenAlex
- W2152249579
- Cited by
- 670
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 32.62
- 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: How Do We Justify Knowledge Produced Within Interpretive Approaches? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1094428104272000
- The paper
- Sandberg, J. (2005). How Do We Justify Knowledge Produced Within Interpretive Approaches? Organizational Research Methods. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428104272000
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.
