The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
An assessment of the scientific merits of action research
Abstract
This article describes the deficiencies of positivist science for generating knowledge for use in solving problems that members of organizations face. Action research is introduced as a method for correcting these deficiencies. When action research is tested against the criteria of positivist science, action research is found not to meet its critical tests. The appropriateness of positivist science is questioned as a basis for judging the scientific merits of action research. Action research can base its legitimacy as science in philosophical traditions that are different from those which legitimate positivist science. Criteria and methods of science appropriate to action research are offered.
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
Action Research and Minority Problems
Lewin, K. (1946) · Journal of Social Issues · doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1946.tb02295.x · Cited by 6,554
Cited by
The Case Research Strategy in Studies of Information Systems
Benbasat, I., Goldstein, D. K., & Mead, M. (1987) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/248684 · Cited by 4,716
Baum, F., MacDougall, C., & Smith, D. (2006) · Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health · doi:10.1136/jech.2004.028662 · Cited by 2,420
A Critical Perspective on Action Research as a Method for Information Systems Research
Baskerville, R. L., & Wood-Harper, A. T. (1996) · Journal of Information Technology · doi:10.1177/026839629601100305 · Cited by 390
Israel, B. A., Checkoway, B., Schulz, A., & Zimmerman, M. (1994) · Health Education Quarterly · doi:10.1177/109019819402100203 · Cited by 788
Contingency Perspectives of Organizational Strategy: A Critical Review of the Empirical Research
Ginsberg, A., & Venkatraman, N. (1985) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258125 · Cited by 725
Metadata
- Authors
- I. Susman, G., & D. Evered, R.
- Venue
- STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI
- Publisher
- Franco Angeli
- Published
- 2023-01
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 135-161
- ISSN
- 0391-8769 (ISSN-L)
- 1972-4969
- OpenAlex
- W4320009379
- Cited by
- 1,574
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 14.55
- 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: An assessment of the scientific merits of action research. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3280/so2022-002006
- The paper
- I. Susman, G., & D. Evered, R. (2023). An assessment of the scientific merits of action research. STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI. https://doi.org/10.3280/so2022-002006
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.
